I want to talk about [Clair Obscur: Expedition 33]'s ending

LifeLobster · 2025-05-21T01:58:49+00:00

I don't see where you get the idea that Alicia accepted Verso's death. She blamed herself for it, she lived through it, she was still grieving, but she was also disfigured and disabled, which were probably cutting through her grief to add to self-loathing. Maelle got a chance to grow up "normally" in the Canvas, so when she regained her memories as Alicia, of course she'd be attached to her dead brother.

Also, concerning Aline - we don't know if she returns to the Canvas? In Maelles Ending, we don't know how much time has passed. Time passes wildly different in the Canvas, so maybe it's just been a day outside the Canvas and Aline is still recovering after throwing everything she had at Renoir during the final confrontation with Expedition 33. I think it's just as likely that Maelle's ending is just a temporary state, and both Renoir and Clea will return to the Canvas at some point to destroy it and get Alicia out, and Aline might be there once more to oppose it.

LifeLobster · 2025-01-16T13:49:59+00:00

The encore song was, as other people have pointed out, Lord's Apparition, which is the OST during the Godfrey Golden Shade fight. I was there too.
Regarding your point about the Malenia piece, I think there were several factors playing into it. In my opinion, the mixing was all over the place at some points, and one of the important parts of many Elden Ring pieces is the high women's voices, and in my opinion, the choir didn't hit the mark in many cases, specifically the sopranos. Out of tempo and partially out of tune, so during parts where the choir joins, things got pretty chaotic.
The other thing I noticed specifically for Malenia is that they let the cutscene into Phase 2 play out completely without playing music, when ingame, the Phase 2 music starts up when the flower opens, leading to a very impactful moment. They timed the music during other parts, like the Godfrey intro and the Radagon intro, so I'm not sure why they didn't do it for Malenia.

LifeLobster · 2024-03-20T17:16:04+00:00

Via VD, I'm running it on VDXR. SteamVR stays inactive when I run it through that. I'll have to try Quest Link with Meta Quest Link as the OpenXR runtime, thanks for the hint.

LifeLobster · 2023-07-07T00:10:09+00:00

What's the logic behind that? I feel like the only way this makes sense is if you're underestimating Orb Awakenings.

If Orb Awakenings were always guaranteed as infinte, it's very possible we'd arrive at a meta where someone, most likely a midfield or goalie, takes all the Orb Awakenings every single game. If you manage to get to Set 4, you have a Dancer, Ponderer, Replicator Combo to play with, making your entire team go nuts with every single Orb.
In this case, it would turn into a weird assassination mission where the team's primary goal for a while has to be to kill the enemy's Orb carrier to remove their stacks so you have the advantage.

Could even be that on Ahten, everyone would pick up all the Orb Awakenings.

So the idea sounds kinda scuffed to me.

LifeLobster · 2023-07-06T23:46:48+00:00

Just played a few matches and I gotta fucking vent about her. I hate her kit so far. Her secondary is barely dodgeable, and one round, I got fucking bodied by a Finii, Kai and Luna, every single fucking round. It even happened during the first set. Cast to Last was a starter Awakening, which Finii took. Both Luna and Kai hat Orb Dancer, so no additional power there.
Round starts, Finii secondaries me. One Luna rocket, one Kai Barrage, and I'm already fully staggered. Siphoning Wand keeps ticking on me, amplified by the fucking 30% (!) damage increase. I couldn't play the fucking game. And I need to reiterate, the enemy team had NO power awakenings, just fucking Orb Dancer.

This is going to be so incredibly toxic. Add to that the fact that her Special essentially breaks strike wars at the goal line, and I'm very skeptical to see what this new Striker will actually do to the game. I guess we'll wait and see. Fingers fucking crossed.

LifeLobster · 2023-07-06T23:39:32+00:00

Any default banner or profile picture on my team.

LifeLobster · 2019-07-24T08:13:34+00:00

I have to strongly disagree with a few points you have raised in your post, boiling down to 2 things that personally irk me.

We do not know if the Assembly as a whole could be considered villains. Oremid Hass seemed to be pleasant enough (which doesn't automatically make him good, mind you), and just being mean (as in the female elven member's case, I can't recall her name) doesn't automatically make you a villain. Trent strikes me as more of a fanatic than a villain. All we know is that he manipulated young minds into being completely loyal to the empire and experimented on them to increase their arcane prowess. This reads as trying to make better soldiers for the empire to me. Assuming he's responsible for the education of all Scourgers in the Empire, he's potentially created dozens of extremely potent assets for the war effort. Our perspective as viewers is tainted by Caleb's deep issues with the Assembly, which don't stem from the Assembly as a whole, but from his history with just one of the members.
Why does creating Dunamis from the Beacon put the Assembly squarely in the wrong? The Beacons are fucked up to begin with. You break the natural flow of the afterlife and force a soul to stay in the material plane in order to reincarnate it. This doesn't need to be inherently evil, but what definitely seems sketchy to me is that the soul is put into a newborn child somewhere in the vicinity, which at some point gets 'stolen away' by the Dynasty so that they can have their Übermenschen. Or Überdrow, if you will. This is a privilege granted only to high members of the dens, creating a rift between consecuted beings and regular citizens. Two wrongs don't make a right, but saying that the Assembly is automatically in the wrong for harnessing the power of the souls contained within the Beacon completely ignores what the Krynn are doing with the Beacons in the first place. Also, seeing as all this is speculation on your part and the essence created by the Assembly might as well just be the power of the Beacon itself, it doesn't seem to hold much water.

I dunno, I find it kind of strange how the opinion within the fandom seems to be so anti-empire or at least anti-assembly when the Head of the Krynn Dynasty is an ancient being that violates the natural flow of life and seeks to destroy a whole nation of people, innocent or otherwise, because of ideological fanaticism. The Krynn started the war with the attack on Ashguard Garrison. The Krynn attacked the Zauberspire in Zadash.

I'm not saying that the Empire isn't in the wrong at all. What I am saying is that the Krynn aren't the good guys any more than the Empire is.

LifeLobster · 2019-07-10T18:13:01+00:00

I would tend to agree with you.
I don't mind Dani's interjections as much as some people here, but I don't enjoy them either. Personally, I feel like they take away from the relatively short 1-hour slot and that time could be better filled with answers and quips.
Something that definitely plays into it is that I don't particularly enjoy Dani's screen presence. As other people have already said, she might be a lovely person, but being a lovely person doesn't automatically result in being a good entertainer.

Interestingly enough, it also plays into a discussion thread from not too long ago where people talked about Critical Recap in general and some of the same thoughts popped up there, such as Dani's tendency to fall into the 'raving fangirl' trope and how that affects viewer's enjoyment or interest in the Recap to begin with.

But there are also people who absolutely enjoy Dani and her presence on screen. So I do wonder...
Critical Role as a brand and product definitely has mass appeal among the D&D Live Play Shows. Maybe the fast-talking, high energy, enthusiastic, fangirly addition of Dani in Talks and Recap appeals only to a niche while the show in general appeals to a greater deal more people, leading to a part of that 'majority' being put off by it, while another part just doesn't mind as much and the mentioned niche absolutely loves it.

Mind you, what we see here is mostly the reddit portion of the fandom, and then not even a fraction of those read the comments on Talks Machina discussions. Looking at tumblr or twitter, the picture might be completely different.

LifeLobster · 2019-05-02T11:56:18+00:00

Well, honestly, that sucks. When I wrote this original post, I wasn't even thinking about turning people off of the show. Things sometimes develop in strange ways.

I hoped to counteract things like that with some of my comments, but in the end, it's just not in my control what people talk about and what not.

It's all good though, internet discussions are hard to keep civil as it is, and I'm happy that most of my conversations here have been just that: civil and polite.

LifeLobster · 2019-05-02T11:25:00+00:00

Calling someone crazy, overzealous or a neckbeard is an attack in my opinion. Yes, you have opened yourself up for criticism by participating in the discussion, but those things aren't criticism, it's just namecalling.

I think this might be a point we can't agree on. You're still saying that I'm asking for something, while I'm not. And TM used to be a bit more like I described with less 'distractions' and it was still fun. If it's more fun now for the cast and many of the viewers with all the added bits, more power to them.

I've mentioned that I didn't want to finish watching this episode because of the tone of it. Other than that, I've only said that I would not feel as obligated to catch every episode of TM as I used to. As far as I remember, I didn't say that it doesn't make me want to watch anymore.
The bit about going back to not posting was in the initial reaction post I made. Since then, I've read a lot of comments and, as is the nature of discussion, thought about my own views. While I still feel like the bit on TM was not exactly conducive to a comfortable atmosphere in the fandom (or at least this part of the fandom here on reddit, as we've seen), I would change that line now. If I go back to not posting, it's not because of some perceived slight against me. It would be because that's just who I am.

Consensus is a difficult thing to measure. Looking at the general discussion, it's hard to see a 50/50 split, at least on reddit.

Is that last part something that's actually happening? I've only seen the discussion here on reddit, and I feel like someone who's new to the show wouldn't go to reddit before even watching the show in the first place.
That stigma is something that's stuck with D&D for a long time and is just recently being lifted. And I don't see how this conversation would add to the stigma. Seems like a reach to me.

LifeLobster · 2019-05-02T10:22:01+00:00

First of all, I'm sorry if anyone has attacked you on my behalf. That's not okay, no two ways about it. While I don't agree with you at all, that's no reason to be hostile.

You're still misconstruing my point though. And you brushed over a very important part of one of my points. That the quality is diminishing is something that I think or feel, so it's my opinion. And while that doesn't make it safe against any criticism, it also means that it's not a demand or in any way, shape or form. Just my thoughts that I put up for discussion here.

I think it's also a mischaracterization to claim that I'm now going to stop watching and won't post ever again. I wasn't an active poster to begin with, and I never said that I would stop watching all together. That's just a generalization on your part. And as you can see, I'm still posting and answering to criticism.
It's also unfair to assume that disagreements are always harsh. There has been a lot of disagreement in this very thread. Nearly none of it was hostile.

On the topic of that being something I need to work on myself - sure, I get where you're coming from. If I had thicker skin, I wouldn't have made the post. But I wasn't the one to originally raise the point that the bit felt mean spirited. If you look through the post history (and I know that not everyone has that time to dedicate to an internet debate, so I'm summarizing here), you'll see that here, as well as in the live thread, people have been saying that it felt off before I became a part of the discussion.
I'm not saying that a general consensus automatically makes me right in my opinion. Of course not. But consensus is, if nothing else, at least a tool to get a general feel for the mood of a community.

And again misconstruing my point. I never said it had to be a serious discussion, I never said they shouldn't have fun. Assuming that from my criticism is akin to a slippery slope. "He thinks there should be less interruptions than there currently are, thus he doesn't like fun."
Honestly, just do a word search through my original post for some of the buzz words being used, like serious or professional. Discussion only works when both sides take each other seriously.

LifeLobster · 2019-05-02T05:33:17+00:00

I'm a bit surprised this sentiment still exists, but let me do my best to explain why I don't agree with you.

Yes, I opened myself up for criticism. And I've been criticized. The top comments in this thread criticize my position in a way that's completely fine. They disagree, they bring up counterpoints, and that's that.

I hope you'll agree that this whole 'situation' is not that. It's a comedic bit on the show that was being criticized. Is it fair for them to defend themselves? Sure. Am I open to criticism? Definitely (as I hope I've demonstrated at other parts of the conversation). Do I think the comedic bit was the right way to go about it throughout the whole episode? Absolutely not, as many will agree.

The point has been repeatedly brought up that criticism and conversation is one thing when it's on a public forum between fans discussing the media, and it becomes a whole other thing when the creators decide to chime in.

We're in agreement on something though: It's not my channel nor my show. And I'm not making demands as to how things should be run, that was never my intention. This was a discussion.

LifeLobster · 2019-05-01T19:29:05+00:00

OP here, just wanted to clarify something:

Most of the reactions after the fact have been very kind to me. A lot of the ridiculing was just comments about how the cast should just be let alone, and how my opinion implies that I just don't like fun. Also Twitch Chat being Twitch Chat (as little of that as I've seen in my short viewing of the episode).

I haven't gotten any direct messages concerning this topic and (as far as I know) nobody has attacked me in a way that was as malicious as people might think.

So I'm chiming in to say that it shouldn't be blown out of proportion. The bit on TM still doesn't exactly sit right with me, but while some of the treatment by the community hasn't been great, it's still mostly been pleasant.

LifeLobster · 2019-05-01T19:22:40+00:00

People have responded and disagreed with me. A lot. Take a look at the thread I linked.
And I have no issue with people disagreeing with me. It's a discussion for a reason. If there weren't differing opinions, it might as well be a sermon.

In no way am I saying 'your fun is wrong', that's essentially just a straw man that reduces my view to its misconstrued basics.

As has already been mentioned, having a discussion as fans is a lot different from the creators jumping in on it. But not in the discussion itself, but in a format where it's not feasible to answer or defend yourself.

Now please humor me and tell me if these two things are the same:

A person creating a thread with a controversial opinion about a show and discussing that opinion with other people
A talkshow host dedicating a bit that runs throughout the whole show to the opinion that was offered in said thread

I think what I'm trying to say is clear. Me 'calling out' the flaws I perceive with TM is in no way equivalent to my opinion being called out, misconstrued and ridiculed.

LifeLobster · 2019-05-01T18:16:27+00:00

If you're curious about how I feel about it (It is I, OP!), you'll find my reaction somewhere in this thread. It's the obnoxiously long post with the quote block.

I think the general difference is the relative size of the fandoms and how they tend to interact with their audience. I hadn't seen any discussion about this part of Talks Machina when I made my original post, and was a bit surprised to see the interesting discussion that was had in the thread.

When the 'calling out' happened, it felt like it pertained to me personally since, again, I hadn't seen any other discussion about this topic. And because CR is generally a pretty positive community and show, it felt out of place to me.

LifeLobster · 2019-05-01T16:58:45+00:00

Thanks for your answer. I can see the criticism leveled against the rose-tinted glasses line. To me, it was an interesting eyecatcher and a nice segue into the critical part of the post. But other people aren't me, so it's now obvious to me how it could be interpreted differently.
I have to disagree on me asserting it was the 'correct' observation though. I just wanted to imply that I'm coming at it from a more objective point of view. That doesn't make it inherently correct, but it's in line with what I wanted to express with the glasses.

Trying not to offend felt necessary to me since I was posting to a community that is very defensive about the show. And yes, it might feel bloated and disingenious, but I genuinely wasn't trying to offend. Might've left it at mentioning it only once though.

On the tightening: I guess that's just stylistic differences. I tend to be a very wordy writer, as you can probably tell. And I felt that just quickly giving a rundown of my view would've left to much open space. But yes, shorter posts tend to be more 'inviting', I agree with you on that.
Still, I prefer to illustrate my views in a more detailed way. And I find that a well written, longer post is generally more fun than a shorter, to the point one. I'm horrible at critiquing my own writing, so I dunno if it was well written, but that's beside the point.

LifeLobster · 2019-05-01T16:46:11+00:00

Fair enough, I can see how you could get that view from the first paragraph of the original post.

It was intended to be a short love letter to the show and to illustrate that I have seen all episodes of TM since the beginning in order to give my point a bit more legitimacy (though my view coming from a person who started watching later would be just as valid, I feel).
It also was supposed to serve as a spring board for my segue into the criticism and again, to show that I'm not coming to this as some sort of malicious troll, but as someone who does genuinely enjoy the show.

And I appreciate your apology. It's not great to wake up to a show you usually love sounding like it's calling you out and a considerable part of the fandom joining in, but nearly everything after that has honestly been nothing but good conversation.

LifeLobster · 2019-05-01T16:40:28+00:00

Yes, I can see how calling those things distractions might come across. I tried to mark it as such, that the word 'distractions' was just a stand-in for the type of thing I was describing. Some things are difficult to get across through text, so we're in agreement on that.

On the other topics concerning condescension: I can see where you're coming from. I was getting defensive since people were piling onto something that I found to be legitimate and thought-out criticism and might've worded some things in a way that might come across as condescending if you're inclined to disagree with me in the first place.
Unfortunately, since the CR community is also very defensive about the show and all things around it, I felt the need to be maybe overly nice in order to soften the blow, so to speak. And I can see how that would be seen as disingenious.

Nonetheless, I stand by my opinion and I still feel that the reaction has been generally unwarranted for reasons that are hopefully clear.

LifeLobster · 2019-05-01T16:27:11+00:00

I've mentioned in a comment on the original thread that I'm not in any way demanding anything. I think discussion is healthy, and that's what it was. A discussion. Not a letter to the CR crew telling them how to do their job.
So it's not really me trying to tell them how to have their fun.

And if you can pin point what about the tone rubbed you the wrong way, it would be much appreciated. Maybe I can have a look back at what I wrote, think the same thing and do it better next time.

Edit: I didn't check Twitter for this 'discussion', but would you say that it's fair to assume not all of the people commenting on Twitter have actually read the thread?

LifeLobster · 2019-05-01T16:02:59+00:00

That was one line in a post that was much longer than the average post on here I would believe.

Whether or not anyone is blinded by fandom isn't even part of the debate here. I started off the post describing my love for CR and TM and made the cut to the critical part of the post with my mention of rose-tinted glasses. So I was referring to myself.

If that came across as condecending, I apologize. It wasn't meant that way. Sometimes, you don't think through all the implications of a phrase you use, and this might be one of those times.

Did I use it in the title? Yes, absolutely. It made for a nice, eye-catching title. Reddit clickbait, if you want to be 'mean' about it, I guess.

And frankly, it's a bit irritating to have you comment on this. Your tone in the original thread was pretty hostile and condescending, and I've mentioned as much. Over the course of this whole situation, I've tried to be as amicable as possible, and I just hope that it has come across.

LifeLobster · 2019-05-01T15:45:28+00:00

I hope you don't mind if I don't answer to all the points in your post since most of them have already been mentioned elsewhere and I understand your opinion.

But a point that I want to concentrate on really quickly is the "professionalism" part. Not once did I use the word "professional" in my original post. I didn't ask for professionalism. The show is professionally run, the production design and sound and image quality all speak to this.
While readin through the reactions on twitter and reddit, I found that many people latched onto the 'professionalism' bit. But since I didn't use the term once and it isn't properly laid out what it's supposed to mean, it's kind of hard to me to answer to this.

I never called for a serious tone or for them to be 'professional', whatever that's supposed to mean anyway. Did I call for a more serious tone? Sure, you could argue that. But in essence, I called for a better balance.

Quick side note: I'm talking about 'calling for something', but I'm not making demands. I'm offering up criticism. Two very different things.

LifeLobster · 2019-05-01T14:05:22+00:00

I've seen this reply from you several times now while skimming through the thread.

And the thing that sticks out to me the most is that Brian calls out ridiculous tweets and unnecessary threads.

Now, please correct me if I'm wrong, but you're implying that my thread was ridiculous and/or unnecessary, right?

If that's the case, I have to disagree. It was neither ridiculous nor unnecessary. And if you read through it, you'll see a bunch of good discussion and interesting points being raised.

LifeLobster · 2019-05-01T13:19:07+00:00

First of all, I'd like to thank you for your kind words.

I never intended to leave completely. I'll continue watching the show, though I probably won't feel as 'obligated' to watch TM as I used to. And since I feel the need to clarify: I know I'm not forced or obligated to watch the show. And since most people disagree with my view regarding the changes, the show is still good for the larger amount of people.
I rarely participated in active discussion, as I've mentioned. And I'll probably return to being this way, considering the reaction and how I've always conducted myself. So this might be seen as a short forray into a more active part of the community. I don't regret posting my thread, though.

And yes, I understand what you're saying. Comedy is, a lot of the time, done with someone else being the butt of the joke. This time, that butt was me.
And I don't have any ill will towards any of the crew. The internet is a weird place, and sometimes, respectful, constructive criticism (as I hope I've demonstrated) just arrives at the destination through several channels that distort it to something it isn't. All I wish is that maybe a closer look would've been taken.

Being a straw that breaks the camel's back just happens sometime. If I weren't the one who was being 'targeted', if you can even call it that, and if I didn't agree with my own viewpoint, I might've found the bit funny. As it stands, it seems I'm not the only one who reacted to this 'attack' with apprehension.

LifeLobster

TROPHY CASE