We get it, you hate the LiS franchise. Got the memo from you making an entire playthrough on both games simply just shitting on them, as well as multiple comments on YouTube doing so as well. ^^
it's near the end in two whales diner when everyone's there. she's sitting on the floor next to the front entrance. it's before you meet "evil max". or as i like to call her, "max".
Does anyone one still remember LiS1? I was just wondering, in what part of Max's Nightmare can Max see the Homeless Lady and hear her say:
… more Max, "Thanks for that warning, Max. You treated me like a human, not like trash. I sure hope you do that for everybody in town." n- if warned
Max, "I've already lived forever... maybe you can help others live too..." -if not warned
I don't think i've seen it anywhere in my playthrough, and not even in the Youtubers' playthroughs.
Can you please point the exact location, or post a video link? thanks
It was horribly blatant padding...running through the school several times...the avoid puzzle parts...the padding actually added 40 minutes … moreto the game. Though that is not to say I did not love the over all game...but yeah...I wish I could kick the person at DONTNOD who thought that was a good idea in the nuts.
I also hope they don't fall into the trap again, where they want us to care for a certain character, who acts so unsympathetic it breaks the… more whole story.
Life is Strange 1's narrative doesn't really work if you dislike Chloe, especially in the last two episodes. Sure, there's the supernatural and murder-mystery subplots, but the former is by far the weakest part of the game, by being demoted into a mere plot-device most of the time, while the latter is pretty underdeveloped, since Chloe's character gets the center-stage.
Don't make the little brother be a piece of shit, please.
I get why people might like her, but that doesn't change the fact that I simply don't. There were scenes where I felt bad or good for her, but she's still an asshole in my book.
She’s abusive, manipulative, controlling, reckless, entitled, moronic, self-centered, always blames others for her problems, has no respect for authority, hypocritical, a wannabe punk, and, well as GSSalvador said, an asshole.
Yeah, her father died, it sucks and left a traumatic impact on her, but she always uses this as a crutch, which she then uses to beat people over the head with until you feel bad for her. She constantly uses it as an excuse for why her life is so fucked up, rather than accept any personal responsibility for her actions. Maybe her life is so shitty because she is a shitty person who makes bad decisions, but that’s not what the game wants you to think, no it always has to be someone else’s fault, it can never be precious and “amaze balls” Chloe. She even has a line in the game, I believe in Episode 3, where she says she has to blame someone else because, otherwise, it’s her fault, and she says “Fuck that.”
Let’s look at a great example of a character who also lost a parent at an extremely young age, but turned that loss into a strength...Katara from Avatar: The Last Airbender. She lost her mother when she was 8, she was murdered when she lied to a Fire Nation soldier and said that she was the last remaining waterbender in the South Pole in order to protect Katara. All she has left of her is her necklace, which she continuously wears throughout the show because of her love for her. However, while Chloe went down a path of rebelliousness and self-pity, Katara literally went in the opposite path. Her mother is a constant source of determination and motivation for her, and while she does reference it a lot throughout the show, unlike Chloe, it’s never seen as a crutch or an excuse. She becomes a more compassionate, loving, nurturing, and caring person because of her loss, and she was always the most hopeful and optimistic person in the show, being a constant sourced strength and guidance for the group, even in their worst times. Her passion, comes from loss. There’s only one real time you see how her mother’s death has a negative impact on her character, but that’s only when she has the opportunity to confront her mother’s killer and years worth of pent up hatred comes out in the form of revenge, but it’s tackled by the writers in a much more mature and complex manner than anything LiS ever did with Chloe. Yeah, the show meant for kids had smarter writing and better character growth than LiS, I said it and I’ll defend it to the death.
Katara is the antithesis to Chloe, Katara is an example of what people like Chloe should strive to be. But all I here is how “sympathetic” Chloe is and how we should feel bad for her, and that just gives her more of an excuse to act the way she does throughout the game. Chloe is a horrible person, I’m sorry, but you can’t change my mind on that.
reckless, entitled, moronic, self-centered, always blames others for her problems
yeah, I can agree with that?, but thats why I like her. She’s the perfect best friend imo
has no respect for authority
She has to?? FUCK the “authority”.
David’s a home wrecker who’s thinks bosses everyone around and thinks Chloe and Joyce are supposed to follow his orders. Principal Wells was corrupt. I love the fact she that she doesn’t fold for anyone
She’s abusive, manipulative, controlling, reckless, entitled, moronic, self-centered, always blames others for her problems, has no respect … morefor authority, hypocritical, a wannabe punk, and, well as GSSalvador said, an asshole.
Yeah, her father died, it sucks and left a traumatic impact on her, but she always uses this as a crutch, which she then uses to beat people over the head with until you feel bad for her. She constantly uses it as an excuse for why her life is so fucked up, rather than accept any personal responsibility for her actions. Maybe her life is so shitty because she is a shitty person who makes bad decisions, but that’s not what the game wants you to think, no it always has to be someone else’s fault, it can never be precious and “amaze balls” Chloe. She even has a line in the game, I believe in Episode 3, where she says she has to blame someone else because, otherwise, it’s her fault, and she says “Fuck that.”
Let’s loo… [view original content]
The thing is that while David's actions are, at best, questionable, and at worst, abusive, what we saw was an actual and genuine desire to help Chloe. He's not innocent and has problems, but he had good intentions, and he's certainly not a home wrecker. And despite how Chloe treats him, you can see he still cares for her, you see that in BtS, and you also see that in Episode 5 of the original when he learns about Chloe's death. He wanted Chloe to get her life back on track and hold herself accountable, he just has a really bad way of showing it (setting up cameras throughout the house).
But him and Wells aren't the only two people I'm referring to when I say "authority," another person is her own mom, who also wants what's best for Chloe but does it more through love and compassion, rather than David's pushing and demanding. And yet, despite what she does for her, Chloe doesn't listen to her as well. You have all these people that are, in some way, trying to help Chloe, and she continues to shut them out or refuses to listen to them, and that's where my hatred for her starts.
reckless, entitled, moronic, self-centered, always blames others for her problems
yeah, I can agree with that?, but thats why I like… more her. She’s the perfect best friend imo
has no respect for authority
She has to?? FUCK the “authority”.
David’s a home wrecker who’s thinks bosses everyone around and thinks Chloe and Joyce are supposed to follow his orders. Principal Wells was corrupt. I love the fact she that she doesn’t fold for anyone
It was horribly blatant padding...running through the school several times...the avoid puzzle parts...the padding actually added 40 minutes … moreto the game. Though that is not to say I did not love the over all game...but yeah...I wish I could kick the person at DONTNOD who thought that was a good idea in the nuts.
The point is that Chloe is flawed and damaged, because she clings permanently to the past. Even her helping Max discover her powers, and her attempting to find Rachel, is motivated by the desire to feel loved, accepted and stable. The reason she's a great character is because she evolves to realise that her behavior is selfish and destructive, and therefore sacrifices herself for all of Arcadia Bay by telling Max to go back in time, stop her from ever knowing Max after she left for Seattle, or getting closure on Rachel, to save everyone else and get justice for the girls affected by Nathan and Jefferson.
Chloe is broken, selfish and flawed, but also endearing, and selfless in the end.
She’s abusive, manipulative, controlling, reckless, entitled, moronic, self-centered, always blames others for her problems, has no respect … morefor authority, hypocritical, a wannabe punk, and, well as GSSalvador said, an asshole.
Yeah, her father died, it sucks and left a traumatic impact on her, but she always uses this as a crutch, which she then uses to beat people over the head with until you feel bad for her. She constantly uses it as an excuse for why her life is so fucked up, rather than accept any personal responsibility for her actions. Maybe her life is so shitty because she is a shitty person who makes bad decisions, but that’s not what the game wants you to think, no it always has to be someone else’s fault, it can never be precious and “amaze balls” Chloe. She even has a line in the game, I believe in Episode 3, where she says she has to blame someone else because, otherwise, it’s her fault, and she says “Fuck that.”
Let’s loo… [view original content]
In terms of being compared to the original? Absolutely. But at least BtS didn’t make Chloe fat and have her hang herself because she was pregnant with Luk- whoops wrong character.
The point is that Chloe is flawed and damaged, because she clings permanently to the past. Even her helping Max discover her powers, and her attempting to find Rachel, is motivated by the desire to feel loved, accepted and stable.
Is it though? Are you so sure that's her reasoning, or is it because she just wants people to feel bad for her. I recall a great reading from Dr. Jordan Peterson's book "12 Rules For Life," and in Chapter 3, in a section entitled "Rescuing The Damned," he talks about those who help others in need (Max), but also those who are at the bottom (Chloe). Here's an edited part in particular that I love:
But not everyone who is falling is a victim, and not everyone at the bottom wishes to rise, although many do and many manage it. Nonetheless, people will often accept or even amplify their own suffering, as well as that of others, if they can brandish it as evidence of the world's injustice.
Are you so sure the person crying out to be saved has not decided a thousand times to accept his lot of pointless and worsening suffering, simply because it is easier than shouldering any true responsibility? Are you enabling a delusion? Is it possible that your contempt would be more salutary than your pity?
But let's go with your idea that she wants to be accepted and loved, the question is does having that type of reason justify horrible behavior? For example, you have a picture of Marlon as your profile picture. We understand his reasoning and the external conditions as to why he did what he did. It was an attempt to save everyone else at the boarding school, that he would give up two people and save several. We also understand that he's a kid with a lot of pressure on his shoulders to keep things running, despite low food, a shrinking safe zone, and dealing with several losses. But does that excuse his actions in the end? My answer is no. Even though you understand why he did what he did, or why Chloe acts the way she does, that does not mean you have to approve or even support their actions. You can still understand them, but also criticize them and believe that their viewpoint, or their actions, are morally wrong and only going to cause more harm to themselves than good.
but also endearing, and selfless in the end.
When she tells you to go back and time and let her die, sure, but if you choose to rip up the photo, which is what she didn't want you to do, she doesn't seem to care at all that Max just condemned everyone, including her mother, to death. They also drive through the destroyed town and numerous dead bodies as they ride off into the sunset together.
I also have a couple more passages from Dr. Peterson's book that I think not only beautifully describe how bad Chloe is, but how unhealthy her friendship/relationship with Max is as well.
It's the easiest path to choose, moment to moment, although it's nothing but hell in the long run.
You're associating with people who are bad for you not because it's better for anyone, but because it's easier. You know it. You're friends know it. You're all bound by an implicit contract - one aimed at nihilism, and failure, and suffering of the stupidest sort. You've all decided to sacrifice the future to the present.
Before you help someone, you should find out why that person is in trouble. You shouldn't merely assume that he or she is a noble victim of unjust circumstances and exploitation.
If you buy the story that everything terrible just happened on its own, with no personal responsibility on the part of the victim, you deny that person all agency in the past (and, by implication, in the present and future, as well). In this manner, you strip him or her of all power.
It is far more likely that a given individual has just decided to reject the path upward because of its difficulty.
Maybe your misery is the weapon you brandish in your hatred for those who rose upward while you waited and sank. Maybe your misery is your attempt to prove the world's injustice, instead of the evidence of your own sin, your own missing of the mark, your conscious refusal to strive and to live. Maybe your willingness to suffer in failure is inexhaustible, gives what you use that suffering to prove. Maybe it's your revenge on Being. How exactly should I befriend you when you're in such a place?
If I stay in an unhealthy relationship with you, perhaps its because I'm too weak willed and indecisive to leave, but I don't want to know it. Thus, I continue helping you, and console myself with my pointless martyrdom.
If you surround yourself with people who support your upward aim, they will not tolerate your cynicism and destructiveness.
The point is that Chloe is flawed and damaged, because she clings permanently to the past. Even her helping Max discover her powers, and her… more attempting to find Rachel, is motivated by the desire to feel loved, accepted and stable. The reason she's a great character is because she evolves to realise that her behavior is selfish and destructive, and therefore sacrifices herself for all of Arcadia Bay by telling Max to go back in time, stop her from ever knowing Max after she left for Seattle, or getting closure on Rachel, to save everyone else and get justice for the girls affected by Nathan and Jefferson.
Chloe is broken, selfish and flawed, but also endearing, and selfless in the end.
Since I don’t have enough time to reply to this new glorious message of yours right now, I’ll just respond to the previous comparison you had of Katara as short and quickly as I can.
Chloe lost her entire support group with the death of her dad, and Max moving away. She didn't have a great relationship with Joyce, and it appears Joyce didn't know how to help Chloe. Instead Joyce focused on herself, the only person she knew how to help.
You'll have no disagreement from me that Chloe has some severe flaws. Some, if not many, of her flaws are her armor to protect herself from being hurt (again).
Ultimately, comparing one person against another is futile. Just because Katara was able to go in one direction is not proof that Chloe could do the same. Katara as an example is not an indictment of Chloe. People, situations, and life are not that black and white.
I’ll be back soon(ish) to respond to your recent comment.
Chloe lost her entire support group with the death of her dad, and Max moving away.
And immediately following her mother's death, Katara’s father literally left her with only her brother in the South Pole as he went to go fight in the war. Sokka didn't have a strong relationship with their mother, so Katara, also, had no support group. And again, she still managed to be the most optimistic, caring, and loving person in the show (or at least one of them, the title for loving/caring might have to go to Iroh).
She didn't have a great relationship with Joyce, and it appears Joyce didn't know how to help Chloe. Instead Joyce focused on herself, the only person she knew how to help.
I'm not exactly sure what makes you think that. I do recall Joyce having a self help book I think at one point, but that's the only thing from your post I got. Everything else I don't remember ever being hinted at in the game regarding Joyce not focusing on Chloe.
Just because Katara was able to go in one direction is not proof that Chloe could do the same.
Actually it kind of is. Both are stories of struggles after losing a loved one and parent, but both diverged in how they responded to tragedy. You say how life isn't black and white, and you're right about that, but life is filled with people who have been moved, touched, or influenced by the actions of someone that have caused them to follow in their footsteps or live up to their standards. Chloe never sought out a person that could help her, or she rejected anyone who actually did try to help. One rose above their hardships, while one never even attempted, and when one person is able to do so, it does inspire others to emulate that path to success.
Forgive me if im being a tad bit critical, but I just have to point out what I’ve gotten from you in these posts in terms of logic. Alright, let’s start.
So, Chloe is a terrible person, because after losing her dad, her best friend, her mom to David because BtS and LiS have shown how Joyce was either passive when it came to Chloe vs David or was just outright on David’s side, her other best friend over the course of five years, she didn't get a 16-hour-a-day job as a mechanic, worked her ass off until she became like a half-owner of the most premier body shop in all of Arcadia Bay, found a good man there and had like five kids with him by the time she was 25, all the while supporting her mom and feeding the unemployed dock workers? Oh, shit, and don't forget she "has no respect for authority."
But wait, there's more. She's also a terrible CHARACTER for the same reasons, because every CHARACTER who lost their parents needs to react to the loss in exactly the same way. And not just any way, mind you, they all must act the way Katara does, because who in their right mind would want to write, read or play a game with a character that's in any way different from her?
Chloe lost her entire support group with the death of her dad, and Max moving away.
And immediately following her mother's death, Ka… moretara’s father literally left her with only her brother in the South Pole as he went to go fight in the war. Sokka didn't have a strong relationship with their mother, so Katara, also, had no support group. And again, she still managed to be the most optimistic, caring, and loving person in the show (or at least one of them, the title for loving/caring might have to go to Iroh).
She didn't have a great relationship with Joyce, and it appears Joyce didn't know how to help Chloe. Instead Joyce focused on herself, the only person she knew how to help.
I'm not exactly sure what makes you think that. I do recall Joyce having a self help book I think at one point, but that's the only thing from your post I got. Everything else I don't remember ever being hinted at in the game regarding Joyce not f… [view original content]
yah but it wasn't just her father dying. it was her only friend max abandoning her then joyce hooking up with an assholehead and basically trying to erase william from their house. then later in LiS she's dealing with the whole rachel problem. chloe has serious abandonment issues. it's p obvious in certain moments when it comes out. like getting angry over rachel and thinking she left her like max and learning about her relationship with frank. she feels totally alone.
chloe is very sweet and caring on the inside but like a lot of ppl trying to deal with those kinda issues, she has like a tough exterior to hide all her inner pain. look how she breaks down in the junkyard with rachel in BTS when she's describing how lonely she is and then rachel turning around and leaving. her entire story is just so heartbreaking i don't see how anyone can blame her for how she acts.
She’s abusive, manipulative, controlling, reckless, entitled, moronic, self-centered, always blames others for her problems, has no respect … morefor authority, hypocritical, a wannabe punk, and, well as GSSalvador said, an asshole.
Yeah, her father died, it sucks and left a traumatic impact on her, but she always uses this as a crutch, which she then uses to beat people over the head with until you feel bad for her. She constantly uses it as an excuse for why her life is so fucked up, rather than accept any personal responsibility for her actions. Maybe her life is so shitty because she is a shitty person who makes bad decisions, but that’s not what the game wants you to think, no it always has to be someone else’s fault, it can never be precious and “amaze balls” Chloe. She even has a line in the game, I believe in Episode 3, where she says she has to blame someone else because, otherwise, it’s her fault, and she says “Fuck that.”
Let’s loo… [view original content]
I'm not saying Chloe hasn't endured hardships and tragedy, what I'm saying is that she uses it more as a crutch and refuses to move on, rather than as a strength and rise above it. What I'm saying is that if you constantly claim victimhood and blame everything wrong with you on someone or something else, you're already setting yourself up for future failure, and thus, repeat the same endless cycle of victimization and blame. No one wants to be friends with the person who complains all the time, who has that nihilistic outlook on the world, who will attack you if you don't 100% support them, who guilts you at almost every turn, who controls you like a puppet into doing her bidding, and so on and so forth. And when a person does those things, yeah, it does become a bit challenging to feel sympathetic for them because they can't cope in a way that is healthy, and when people do come along to try and help her, she shuts them out so that she can continue to complain about how no one wants to help her or won't just let her be the sullen and angsty teenager she is.
she didn't get a 16-hour-a-day job as a mechanic, worked her ass off until she became like a half-owner of the most premier body shop in all of Arcadia Bay, found a good man there and had like five kids with him by the time she was 25, all the while supporting her mom and feeding the unemployed dock workers?
I don't even know what you're trying to say or get across with this. At what point did I say or imply any of these things? This entire point here is irrational, so either explain yourself more or stop trying to insist that this was in any way shape or form what I was saying.
every CHARACTER who lost their parents needs to react to the loss in exactly the same way. And not just any way, mind you, they all must act the way Katara does
Again, not what I'm saying. It seems as if you're entire argument is either twisting my words and argument, or making stuff up, which is not how you have a reasonable exchange of ideas or a debate. No, not everyone has, is, or will deal with loss in the same way, my point in comparing Katara and Chloe was to draw a contrast between two similar situations and how both of them responded in different ways. Yes I do find Katara's path the more favorable, the one people who have suffered loss and hardship should actually look to as to how one should cope, and Chloe is the unhealthy and damaging one that people should avoid. That was the point of my argument, and hence why I also referenced those passages from Dr. Peterson's book (which I also see you failed to argue against). I'm not saying Chloe wasn't a compelling character in LiS, she was, definitely the most well developed character in the game. But compelling does not equal likable and sympathetic.
Forgive me if im being a tad bit critical, but I just have to point out what I’ve gotten from you in these posts in terms of logic. Alright,… more let’s start.
So, Chloe is a terrible person, because after losing her dad, her best friend, her mom to David because BtS and LiS have shown how Joyce was either passive when it came to Chloe vs David or was just outright on David’s side, her other best friend over the course of five years, she didn't get a 16-hour-a-day job as a mechanic, worked her ass off until she became like a half-owner of the most premier body shop in all of Arcadia Bay, found a good man there and had like five kids with him by the time she was 25, all the while supporting her mom and feeding the unemployed dock workers? Oh, shit, and don't forget she "has no respect for authority."
But wait, there's more. She's also a terrible CHARACTER for the same reasons, because every CHARACTER who lost their parents needs to react to th… [view original content]
i don't see how anyone can blame her for how she acts.
I understand why she acts, but I also don't think it's the right way to go about it and she's causing herself more harm than good when she acts in this manner. And even if we understand why people do things, that doesn't automatically make them right. A wrong deed is still wrong, even if there are reasons behind it.
And at the end of the day, when we constantly try to blame others for how things are, it ultimately denies personal accountability and responsibility. It implies that our lives are not in our own hands, denying ourselves of our independence and ability to live out our lives. We are all responsible for our own actions, and while tragedy may have impacted our lives, it does not and should not excuse reprehensible actions. To reference a quote from earlier:
If you buy the story that everything terrible just happened on its own, with no personal responsibility on the part of the victim, you deny that person all agency in the past (and, by implication, in the present and future, as well). In this manner, you strip him or her of all power.
yah but it wasn't just her father dying. it was her only friend max abandoning her then joyce hooking up with an assholehead and basically t… morerying to erase william from their house. then later in LiS she's dealing with the whole rachel problem. chloe has serious abandonment issues. it's p obvious in certain moments when it comes out. like getting angry over rachel and thinking she left her like max and learning about her relationship with frank. she feels totally alone.
chloe is very sweet and caring on the inside but like a lot of ppl trying to deal with those kinda issues, she has like a tough exterior to hide all her inner pain. look how she breaks down in the junkyard with rachel in BTS when she's describing how lonely she is and then rachel turning around and leaving. her entire story is just so heartbreaking i don't see how anyone can blame her for how she acts.
The whole “Chloe working a 16-hour-a-day job” rant was mostly just me exaggerating about what I feel like you would do with her character if you were the writer. I read that quote you sent from that book but I still don’t quite understand where you’re coming from with it. I don’t see Max and Chloe’s relationship as “unhealthy”. Complicated is a better word, but not unhealthy.
I like how you describe Chloe as being all these terrible things, but you never bring up her good qualities and how she tries to make amends with her flawed traits.
It's not that she's liked because she's a "terrible person". No one likes a terrible person. I actually hated her for the first two episodes myself. But Chloe redeems herself and grows a lot throughout the 5 episodes, and that's one of the reasons I like her.
Did you pay attention to Chloe’s character in episodes 3-5? Do you remember when Chloe apologized for being a bitch when Max took Kate's call? Or when instead of throwing a fit when Max suggested getting David's help she actually went with it? Or when she asked to die so the city could be saved (which you kinda just glossed over in your response)? I ask because you mentioned you hated the game, and it's common for people to just power through it without exploring or caring about stuff. I know you have like a playthrough on your channel, but I can’t stand watching it because it’s just a bunch of whining. I had a friend (who also hated the game) that actually kept checking his phone during dialogues, which made him miss a big part of the game’s overall experience.
You said you hated the game ever since the first episode. I think maybe that’s the problem? You constantly went into every episode thinking it would stay the same pile of shit as the first episode, and (in your eyes), it did.
i don't see how anyone can blame her for how she acts.
I understand why she acts, but I also don't think it's the right way to go ab… moreout it and she's causing herself more harm than good when she acts in this manner. And even if we understand why people do things, that doesn't automatically make them right. A wrong deed is still wrong, even if there are reasons behind it.
And at the end of the day, when we constantly try to blame others for how things are, it ultimately denies personal accountability and responsibility. It implies that our lives are not in our own hands, denying ourselves of our independence and ability to live out our lives. We are all responsible for our own actions, and while tragedy may have impacted our lives, it does not and should not excuse reprehensible actions. To reference a quote from earlier:
If you buy the story that everything terrible just happened on its own, with no personal responsibility on … [view original content]
I read that quote you sent from that book but I still don’t quite understand where you’re coming from with it. I don’t see Max and Chloe’s relationship as “unhealthy”. Complicated is a better word, but not unhealthy.
For their friendship, I’m often drawn to this particular quote.
If I stay in an unhealthy relationship with you, perhaps its because I'm too weak willed and indecisive to leave, but I don't want to know it. Thus, I continue helping you, and console myself with my pointless martyrdom.
I think dream Max in Episode 5 also summed up her and Chloe’s friendship well, she constantly uses Max as a puppet, a tool for her own ends with little regard for Max herself. And then she guilts Max constantly to try and earn the sympathy points and have Max continue her “pointless martyrdom.” Max, often times, is too weak willed and indecisive, not only silently encouraging Chloe’s behavior, which as I mentioned I do not believe is in Chloe’s best interest, but she lets Chloe call the shots, such as not letting them just go to the police despite overwhelming evidence because “fuck the police” and “the Prescott’s own them,” even though they have definitive proof of wrongdoing. In the end, for neither of them it's particularly good or healthy to stay in this friendship, because Chloe isn't going to change from blaming everyone else for her problems, and Max is just going to keep encouraging and promoting this behavior from her, that's why I see it as unhealthy.
I like how you describe Chloe as being all these terrible things, but you never bring up her good qualities and how she tries to make amends with her flawed traits.
That's because I can't recall any times throughout the game where she "makes amends with her flawed traits." And if she does, it's immediately counteracted by her showing off another huge flaw or doing something horrible.
Did you pay attention to Chloe’s character in episodes 3-5?
Yes I did.
Do you remember when Chloe apologized for being a bitch when Max took Kate's call?
Which made no sense for her to get mad over to begin with, considering how she called on a cell phone and Max could take it anywhere, but it was needed to set up conflict. Also, Max never tells Chloe that the call is from a friend who's extremely depressed and was, much like Chloe, drugged, and contemplating suicide. I don't expect Chloe to know that on her own, but I do expect the game to allow us to convey that information to her, so that's more of me criticizing the situation and how it was presented in the first place. But onto your point, I also remember her wanting to steal money from Blackwell's handicap fund in order to pay back her drug dealer.
Or when instead of throwing a fit when Max suggested getting David's help she actually went with it?
But again, Chloe initially refused to go to the police because "fuck them" in Episode 4. And despite the fact that Max has time powers and she's coming to her in tears telling her not to go in to the party, that it was Jefferson and not Nathan, etc., Chloe STILL doesn't listen and requires huge amounts of convincing before she agrees to go to David. She didn't even trust Max at all, because she's so set in her ways that, when clear evidence is right in front of her, she still took all that convincing. Plus, I also remember her throwing a fit and blaming her own father for dying in Episode 3, once again refusing to shoulder any of the blame for her messed up life on herself.
Or when she asked to die so the city could be saved (which you kinda just glossed over in your response)?
And then when Max chooses to tear up the photo and give up Arcadia Bay, Chloe's response is to do nothing, which kind of throws all of her pleading to save the city, her mother, and even David, out the window. Yeah, if you choose to sacrifice Chloe, it does give her one good deed, and I can respect that, but when you see the alternate version and see her and Max driving through the destroyed Arcadia Bay and numerous dead bodies, riding away together, you wonder what just happened? To me, it just seems like it completely undoes everything Chloe just said.
I ask because you mentioned you hated the game, and it's common for people to just power through it without exploring or caring about stuff.
Regardless of whether it was the original LiS or BtS, I went in with the same mentality and approach as I do with Telltale games. I look at everything, talk to everyone, pay attention to all the dialogues, etc. Despite my hatred for the game, I paid attention, I can't think at one point I ever checked my phone or distracted myself from the game. The only things I didn't really do was when you had the option for Max/Chloe to sit down or stand in a certain area and listen to their internal monologues. Other than that, I explored, I talked, and I didn't power through, and the reason I did that was because I wanted the full experience, to see if there was something I missed from watching others play it, or that I skipped out on some big thing in regards to one of the characters that would maybe cause me to rethink my view on them, but I didn't really get anything. As hard as it may be for you to believe this, I did go into these games with an open mind, I rarely go into something ready to love/hate it, that goes against everything I believe in. I'll praise something when it deserves to be praised, and criticize when it deserves to be criticized (hence why I've been spending the last 3 months working on a review series for criticizing ANF despite loving TWD S1, S2, and TFS).
You said you hated the game ever since the first episode. I think maybe that’s the problem? You constantly went into every episode thinking it would stay the same pile of shit as the first episode, and (in your eyes), it did.
Again, no I didn't because that goes against my principles. Yes I do often joke about how something that has the LiS tag on it that it will suck, but that's all it is, jokes. I do try to approach everything with an open mind, and I don't let my emotions try and get in the way of my judgment and reasoning. When I first heard about the game and read the concept, I was interested, especially since it was influenced in the style of Telltale, it was only after seeing it and how flawed it was that my dislike for it grew, but I didn't hate it from the start. I remember these were my initial thoughts on the episodes from the original game when they came out:
E1: I thought it was pretty disappointing, we didn't really get what was advertised, a lot of the dialogue was pretty cringy, the characters didn't seem all that good, and the lip syncing was abysmal. However, it is the first episode and it does still have promise, I'll give it a pass for just trying to set things up, and hopefully Episode 2 will do more to move the plot forward.
E2: That...somehow ended up being worse than the last episode. It just felt like it was more of the same that I criticized about the first episode, only this time it felt like it dragged on even longer. And despite being advertised on it's mystery, there's not a lot of detective work going on, and the rewind power is either being misused or not explored enough.
E3: The first half is honestly really good and what I expected from this game, good detective work, puzzle solving that relies on my time powers, some decent character development, hopefully the rest of the episode continues on this path. (plays the rest) And it falls right back into the same old problems. Definitely not as bad as the previous episodes, but I still don't think it's good, but the ending was a cool twist.
E4: I actually really liked this episode, this is what I thought LiS was going to be. The beginning segment in the alternate timeline was very well written, more crime solving, and Chloe's discovery of Rachel may just be the best scene of the game. Maybe if it ends on a high note, this series can be pretty good.
E5: Just...what the hell was that?
And I'll even say that, despite not liking what I saw in the gameplay, I do think S2 of LiS has some promise. But that's all this series seems to be, a bunch of promise, that is either squandered or poorly executed.
it's near the end in two whales diner when everyone's there. she's sitting on the floor next to the front entrance. it's before you meet "evil max". or as i like to call her, "max".
Naah man don't compare Chloe vs Kenny. Kenny is like drunk, angry, garbage person, you just ruined my view of Chloe. She is unique and special character that we at least most of us love ( i hope )
I read that quote you sent from that book but I still don’t quite understand where you’re coming from with it. I don’t see Max and Chloe’s r… moreelationship as “unhealthy”. Complicated is a better word, but not unhealthy.
For their friendship, I’m often drawn to this particular quote.
If I stay in an unhealthy relationship with you, perhaps its because I'm too weak willed and indecisive to leave, but I don't want to know it. Thus, I continue helping you, and console myself with my pointless martyrdom.
I think dream Max in Episode 5 also summed up her and Chloe’s friendship well, she constantly uses Max as a puppet, a tool for her own ends with little regard for Max herself. And then she guilts Max constantly to try and earn the sympathy points and have Max continue her “pointless martyrdom.” Max, often times, is too weak willed and indecisive, not only silently encouraging Chloe’s behavior, which as I mentioned I do not belie… [view original content]
me too, i thought chloe was ok. like she was rebellious of the world because her father died, and she was left hanging by her childhood friend-i mean i might feel the same if i only had 1 friend & that friend stops replying & i'm introvert. i mean, compared to Katara, Chloe is weaker. but Avatar is a story of war while LiS is a Highschool emo. But then again, i don't like her doing drugs tho. and what Evan said about Chloe wasting her intelligence i'd have to agree.
Yeah, but here's the thing, I really liked BTS, better than LIS itself in a lot of regards, the problem is the ending feels like it's just realizing it has to end and squanders some interesting plot points. Regardless of whether or not this was a different developer, as Dontnod let them work on their series meaning they had to trust them to give something of similar quality, which I felt they delivered on up until the ending, it's not a good pattern for two games in a series to have endings that aren't well regarded.
Fair points. The Kate situation with the phone in all honesty was pretty stupid. Keep in mind however that Chloe at the time of the party was literally fuming and had the words “KILL” in her brain after finding out what happened to the girl she previously loved. She just wanted revenge, and she didn’t care enough to go to the corrupted police department even with all the evidence. She literally says “Rachel would have wanted us to do this. To get real justice...and revenge.”
As for convincing Chloe, she only actually LISTENS to Max when she talks about how Jefferson hurt HER. If you bring up anything else to Chloe she instantly goes back to “KILL” mode. Why only Max? Because Chloe actually gives a shit and loves Max. She drops her entire revenge quest over her best friend FOR MAX. Again, unhealthy relationship is NOT accurate.
I’d like to also respond to your original comment on this thread about Chloe, and quite frankly clear up exactly how you’re interpreting her character. In my opinion, you are interpreting her character ENTIRELY WRONG.
“She’s abusive”
Abusive is patently absurd, she is the one being regularly abused.
“manipulative”
Manipulative I will give you, in some cases she really plays off Max's guilt. But with the caveat that it isn't deliberate or intentional manipulation, she is simply acting out of insecurity.
“controlling”
Yeah she is a bit controlling with Max. Like the earlier point though, it is merely a manifestation of learned insecurity. A couple of months being treated like an actual person will likely clear it up.
“reckless”
Fuck yes, she is very reckless. That’s what’s fun about her.
“entitled”
I can't really see entitled, at all.
“moronic”
Moronic? At this point you’re just insulting her.
“self-centered”
Self-centered, yes. A major character flaw which she overcomes over the course of the narrative.
“always blames others for her problems”
That's because more often then not other people are to blame for her problems. Yes, it's not a good thing that she refuses to take responsibility for her bad behaviour but ignoring the fact that this is a character who has been abused and marginalized for a third of her life isn't fair. Life shit on her so consistently that she lost the ability to distinguish between the consequences of her own shitty behaviour and life just taking another squat.
“has no respect for authority”
.......i'm sorry, this is supposed to be a bad thing? If I lived in Arcadia Bay I wouldn't respect authority either. The local creepy teenager who’s power hungry dad can order the cops away from the parties where he will be drugging high school girls isn’t exactly the people I would want to respect. If you’re talking about David and his “authority” as well as Blackwell’s staff, I’ll get into that later.
Authority should not always be respected, merely acknowledged.
“hypocritical”
Who the fuck isn't?
“a wannabe punk”
This is another one of those "fucking what?" points.
“and an asshole”
Eh, only to people being an asshole to her.
“Yeah, her father died, it sucks and left a traumatic impact on her, but she always uses this as a crutch, which she then uses to beat people over the head with until you feel bad for her. She constantly uses it as an excuse for why her life is so fucked up, rather than accept any personal responsibility for her actions. Maybe her life is so shitty because she is a shitty person who makes bad decisions, but that’s not what the game wants you to think, no it always has to be someone else’s fault, it can never be precious and “amaze balls” Chloe. She even has a line in the game, I believe in Episode 3, where she says she has to blame someone else because, otherwise, it’s her fault, and she says “Fuck that.” “
Okay, so you have completely and utterly failed to understand both Chloe's trauma and the games presentation of it.
Chloe's trauma is not "dead dad, time to be sad". It is life hitting you with one curve ball after another, never giving you time to recover and starting at your most vulnerable.
William's death was only the beginning of her life going to hell, and what prevented her from dealing with the other stuff, condemning her to a downward spiral.
The father who adored her died, followed immediately by the friend who had been as close as family her entire life leaving and not keeping in touch - abandoning her completely. In one week she lost two thirds of her support network.
But at least she still has her mother, right? Fun fact, when a couple's child dies it is very common for that couple's relationship to fall apart. The stress of grief hitting people in different ways drives them apart like very few things can. It is no surprise the same can happen with a parent and child after the death of the other parent. So William's death strains Chloe's relationship with her mother badly. But that isn't the end of the world, relationships get strained, with time, they can move past it.
Enter David. Two months after her husbands death Joyce meets and hits on David. Way too soon for Chloe to accept, so she immediately and completely rejects him. It is going to take a long time for Chloe to move past that rejection and accept that him as something her mother needs.
Or not, as it turns out. Because David is an abusive misogynist who belittles, mocks, insults and even physically assaults her. And when Chloe desperately needs her mother to kick him to the curb, Joyce does the exact opposite and spends years sometimes even enabling his abuse.
The only part of Chloe's support network that is not completely torn away is literally turned against her, keeping her in an abusive situation she has no escape from.
But life is more then the home, right? There have to be people outside her closest friends and family.
Well, she has just had to leave behind her peers in a normal school because her intelligence has won her a scholarship to an elite school - one filled with rich kids she feels uncomfortable around, at least three of whom are bullying her for coming from a poor family. (You’d know this if you played the beautiful and heartbreaking Farewell episode in BtS.)
The only friend she had from her old school who winds up going to her new school winds up exploiting her grief and loneliness to get her into bed, then when she starts pulling away because for some odd reason guys just aren't doing it for her he literally stalks and assaults her. (Eliot)
But a school is more then the other kids, right? There are the staff too. Like the Principal, who only cares about the status and funding of the school and literally goes looking for reasons to expel her, accusing her of things another student (a promising athlete who will bring in money.......) did and punishing her for deliberately giving another student the wrong answers while outright ignoring the plagiarizing student because unlike Chloe she is connected.
On top of all that, you can add in the stress of being gay and coming to terms with it in a rural town, but that’s more up to you.
So, school and social life are fucked. Good thing she managed to make one friend, right? Haha, no. Said friend - the only thing that kept Chloe from killing herself as her life fell apart, is abducted and murdered.
And then someone with the connections to order the police away from where he intends to kidnap teenage girls drugs, abducts and may have even attempted to rape Chloe - failing only because he under dosed her in response to accidentally overdosing her friend.
So yeah, you can't just boil all of that down "dead dad".
The Chloe we meet in the alternate timeline has been rendered quadriplegic, unable to move as she agonizingly inches towards an inevitable death - and she is still happier and more well adjusted then the Chloe in the main timeline. That is how much main Chloe has suffered.
Sorry for the wall of text.
TLDR: You have completely misinterpreted Chloe’s character.
I read that quote you sent from that book but I still don’t quite understand where you’re coming from with it. I don’t see Max and Chloe’s r… moreelationship as “unhealthy”. Complicated is a better word, but not unhealthy.
For their friendship, I’m often drawn to this particular quote.
If I stay in an unhealthy relationship with you, perhaps its because I'm too weak willed and indecisive to leave, but I don't want to know it. Thus, I continue helping you, and console myself with my pointless martyrdom.
I think dream Max in Episode 5 also summed up her and Chloe’s friendship well, she constantly uses Max as a puppet, a tool for her own ends with little regard for Max herself. And then she guilts Max constantly to try and earn the sympathy points and have Max continue her “pointless martyrdom.” Max, often times, is too weak willed and indecisive, not only silently encouraging Chloe’s behavior, which as I mentioned I do not belie… [view original content]
if you understand why she acts like that then how can you hate her for it? of course people going through all that drama won't make the best decisions all the time. esp if everyone they're closest to keeps disappearing.
i don't see how anyone can blame her for how she acts.
I understand why she acts, but I also don't think it's the right way to go ab… moreout it and she's causing herself more harm than good when she acts in this manner. And even if we understand why people do things, that doesn't automatically make them right. A wrong deed is still wrong, even if there are reasons behind it.
And at the end of the day, when we constantly try to blame others for how things are, it ultimately denies personal accountability and responsibility. It implies that our lives are not in our own hands, denying ourselves of our independence and ability to live out our lives. We are all responsible for our own actions, and while tragedy may have impacted our lives, it does not and should not excuse reprehensible actions. To reference a quote from earlier:
If you buy the story that everything terrible just happened on its own, with no personal responsibility on … [view original content]
she's a bit complicated. sure she's smart and everything but she has like no motivation to apply herself because she feels rejected or forgotten by everyone. there's a kinda self-harm thing to what she's doing. like a lot of people who go through hard times like that go into a downward spiral. like not so much being addicted to drugs or anything but addicted to the self-destructive aspect of it.
me too, i thought chloe was ok. like she was rebellious of the world because her father died, and she was left hanging by her childhood frie… morend-i mean i might feel the same if i only had 1 friend & that friend stops replying & i'm introvert. i mean, compared to Katara, Chloe is weaker. but Avatar is a story of war while LiS is a Highschool emo. But then again, i don't like her doing drugs tho. and what Evan said about Chloe wasting her intelligence i'd have to agree.
Because understanding why a person does something is not the same as excusing them for their actions. Numerous characters in fiction can have understandable or even sympathetic reasons for doing what they do, it doesn't magically make it right or mean that I have to agree with it. Me saying I understand them is saying I get their line of reasoning, I just don't agree with the conclusion they reach.
How much longer can we excuse Chloe for her actions? I get it, her dad died, her best friend left, her new best friend disappeared. I know this sounds heartless, but sometimes it needs to be said, how much longer can we tally her decision making up to this stuff and not up to her own recklessness and immoral character? When do we say, "I get that things haven't been easy for you, but at some point, you need to accept responsibility, move on, and learn to live a good and healthy life."
If there's one thing I can't stand, it's people either making excuses for themselves, or making excuses for someone else. And that' at the end of the day, is why I can't stand Chloe, she's full of excuses and surrounds herself with people that continue to excuse her behavior, which in turn, has not allowed her to grow and accept everything that has happened. We are responsible for our own actions, and that's a concept Chloe fails to realize.
if you understand why she acts like that then how can you hate her for it? of course people going through all that drama won't make the best decisions all the time. esp if everyone they're closest to keeps disappearing.
Eh, I like walls of text, it allows me to think deeper about the argument at hand.
Keep in mind however that Chloe at the time of the party was literally fuming and had the words “KILL” in her brain after finding out what happened to the girl she previously loved. She just wanted revenge, and she didn’t care enough to go to the corrupted police department even with all the evidence. She literally says “Rachel would have wanted us to do this. To get real justice...and revenge.”
It's certainly understandable that she would want revenge, what person in her shoes would not want retribution for something like that. Her decision is still stupid as if she did go and kill Nathan, even if she had a reasoning to do so, she still would have been arrested and jailed for murder, and chances are Max would also go down with her as being an accomplice. Neither of them really thought this thing through or of the repercussions this would clearly have. No law enforcement anywhere would say "Hmm, you killed that kid in cold blood, but you did it because you found your dead girlfriend, guess we'll let you off the hook." That's not how the justice system works.
And as much as you're tired of it, I have to draw the comparison again because both characters went through this. There's an entire episode in Avatar of Katara going on a revenge quest to find the person who killed her mother. It leads her down a dark path, attacking her friends, insulting her brother, committing heinous actions, all leading up to her confrontation with the man who killed her. However, despite going into the dark abyss and everything that happened up until then...she doesn't do it, she spares him and walks away. In the end, while her desire for revenge and "real justice" was strong, her own moral principles won out in the end. A great line from her is, "I wanted to do it. I wanted to take out all my anger at him, but I couldn't. I don't know if it's because I'm too weak to do it, or because I'm strong enough not to." The latter is the real reason, in the end, her own moral principles and convictions won, and despite her anger, she knew she couldn't go through with it because, in the end, it wasn't going to bring her mother back, and while she would feel a sense of relief in the moment, in the long run, it would cause her great pain and regret.
As for convincing Chloe, she only actually LISTENS to Max when she talks about how Jefferson hurt HER. If you bring up anything else to Chloe she instantly goes back to “KILL” mode.
The point still stands that Chloe should still be listening to Max, the one with the ability to rewind time, without needing all that extra convincing. When the girl with time travel powers comes to you and says "Hey listen, it's not Nathan responsible, it's Mr. Jefferson," you listen to them because they probably know what they're talking about.
Again, unhealthy relationship is NOT accurate.
I'm not the only one arguing that it's unhealthy, the other person who says it is, well, Max herself. In the dream sequence, the dream Max is literally spelling out all the bad things Chloe has done and how their relationship is unhealthy and basically "Stockholm syndrome." The game is the one saying it, I'm just choosing to further analyze it.
Abusive is patently absurd, she is the one being regularly abused.
Abuse is not just limited to physical abuse (getting slapped by David), it can come in many forms: mental, emotional, verbal, etc. Her form of abuse is not physical, but it does come through manipulation and guilting towards Max. And since you've already given me manipulating, I rest my case.
Fuck yes, she is very reckless. That’s what’s fun about her.
She literally shoots herself and puts her life in danger by laying down on train tracks. Listen, I like the sight of Chloe getting shot as much as the next person, but how is that fun?
A major character flaw which she overcomes over the course of the narrative.
Still not seeing it. Having one moment at the end of telling Max to go back and kill her, and then immediately acting like it was no big deal if you choose the other option is not really overcoming your self-centeredness.
That's because more often then not other people are to blame for her problems.
If you continue to come up with excuses for bad behavior, you deny them their own independence and agency for making decisions. Suddenly it's no longer "their decision" and if that's the case, then we are denying them their freedom and autonomy. Life hasn't been fair to Chloe, I've never once denied that notion, but again, as I mentioned to someone else, how long can we keep making excuses for her as a means to justify her actions, because I feel as if that point has long been crossed. I can't blame the tragic loss of a loved one from several years ago for my actions today, no one is, or should, buy that.
.......i'm sorry, this is supposed to be a bad thing? If I lived in Arcadia Bay I wouldn't respect authority either. The local creepy teenager who’s power hungry dad can order the cops away from the parties where he will be drugging high school girls isn’t exactly the people I would want to respect. If you’re talking about David and his “authority” as well as Blackwell’s staff, I’ll get into that later.
YES IT'S A BAD THING! I'm not saying people in power are by their nature good, but there is a certain level of respect that is required. You work at your job, you may hate your boss, but you still have to respect them, you can't just go and do whatever you want because "Fuck him and his authority." If you do, you'll be fired. I'm not making things political here, but God knows there were things I disagreed and hated about President Obama, that being said, I always respected the office of the Presidency and would, if I were to meet him, treat him with respect and dignity, despite my ill feelings about him. Whether you like it or not, there is a level of respect that is expected for certain offices and positions, even if you dislike the person who holds it, it does not give you permission to go ahead and do whatever you want because you don't like them.
Who the fuck isn't?
Okay, fair enough. But when either someone else or I personally call out my hypocrisy, I try to think critically about it and remedy it. Chloe doesn't really appear to do that.
Okay, so you have completely and utterly failed to understand both Chloe's trauma and the games presentation of it.
No, I do understand the trauma, what I'm saying is that it has gone beyond the point where we can keep excusing her actions as being under the guise of her father dying several years ago and she isn't responsible for them as a result.
It is life hitting you with one curve ball after another, never giving you time to recover and starting at your most vulnerable.
Chloe is not the only person to have curveballs thrown at them in their life. Real people have as well, and some of them do go down the same path as Chloe, others use it as a motivator. Life is filled with hardship, moments that will knock you on your feet and kick you while you're down, it is up to you in how you respond to that and whether you choose to be the victim of it, or get back up and try again. No one that has ever been successful has never had to deal with the pain of failure and struggle, the reason why they're successful is because they refuse to give up after failing.
Another great example is Clarence Thomas. Born dirt poor in a small Georgia town, a house fire at the age of 7 made him and his entire family homeless, and even before that, his mother struggled to put food on the table to feed him and his siblings. When he was 2, his father ran out on his family. And to make things worse...he was an African American who's ancestors were slaves, growing up in the deep south during the 1940's, 50's, and 60's. He cites his grandfather as the greatest person he has ever known because he taught him the value of hard work and self-reliance. Now, he is one of 9 members on the US Supreme Court. He built himself up from literally nothing, with little to no access to many luxuries we have today, and rose to prominence. His life was far more of a struggle and uphill battle than Chloe, who, while not living luxuriously, had a good education at Blackwell Academy and the memories of a loving father, but threw her opportunity out the window because of her own claim of victimhood.
Or not, as it turns out. Because David is an abusive misogynist who belittles, mocks, insults and even physically assaults her.
Physically assaulting I'll give you, but even that's determinant I believe, he doesn't hit her in all outcomes of the game. And yes, his words and actions can often go too far, but here's one thing you're denying or not interpreting, the fact that David, despite his shortcomings and faults, actually wanted what was best for Chloe. A bad way of showing it, yes, but rooted beneath that exterior was a person that wanted her to succeed, wanted her to mature and accept responsibility, to apply herself, and wanted to get her life back on track. A man who didn't care for her wouldn't have reacted the way he did when he learns about Chloe's death at the hands of Jefferson.
because her intelligence has won her a scholarship to an elite school - one filled with rich kids she feels uncomfortable around, at least three of whom are bullying her for coming from a poor family.
She didn't have to go, she could have turned their offer down or left at anytime and go back to her old school. And I went to a private high school, which was dominated by many affluent and well off families, while I come from a more middle class background. You think I didn't feel out of place hearing about some of these people's lives? Of course I did. You think I wasn't bullied, whether there or when I was in public school? Of course I was. But I didn't let it bother me, I took it in stride and focused on my work.
The only friend she had from her old school who winds up going to her new school winds up exploiting her grief and loneliness to get her into bed, then when she starts pulling away because for some odd reason guys just aren't doing it for her he literally stalks and assaults her. (Eliot)
I'm...not contending that, Eliot was an asshat and essentially the Warren of Before The Storm. Hated him throughout the game, just a completely worthless character.
On top of all that, you can add in the stress of being gay and coming to terms with it in a rural town, but that’s more up to you.
I'm not exactly sure when that was ever a major thing we saw Chloe grasping with. We see her express curiosity when she starts thinking of a female character from Blade Runner, but that's the only real example I can think of of her "coming to terms." That was never really a major reason behind anything she does. I also just plain don't care about a character's sexuality. I've said it before and I'll say it again, I don't care about WHAT a person is, I care about WHO a person is, and being gay is not WHO a person is. And considering how this game takes place in Oregon, one of the most left leaning states in the country, in a time where people have been more accepting and tolerating than ever before in human history, I don't think you even have to factor that in.
Said friend - the only thing that kept Chloe from killing herself
Whoa, where did that come from, you better have some strong evidence to back that up, because suicidal was never one of the things I got from Chloe's character. Wanting to run away and leave Arcadia Bay behind, yeah, but not suicidal.
Again, I recognize it's more than just dead dad, but the reason why I put a lot of emphasis on that is because, well, Chloe puts a lot of emphasis on that. She always goes back to that moment as the one that changed her life. Everything else has had an impact, sure, but that's the biggest one. And again, while some of what you said may be true, I find it hard to excuse many of her actions throughout the game just because of that.
Life is hard, life is cruel, life is unfair, life will chew you up and spit you out, Chloe isn't special because of that, but she thinks that she is.
Do you make excuses for Nathan as well, considering his somewhat abusive and horrible home life? Will you go to the same lengths to defend Nathan's actions as you will for Chloe, that he isn't responsible for them because, despite how wealthy he is, he's also been a victim of abuse from an uncaring father who puts pressure on him all the time and doesn't help his sons obvious mental problems.
Fair points. The Kate situation with the phone in all honesty was pretty stupid. Keep in mind however that Chloe at the time of the party wa… mores literally fuming and had the words “KILL” in her brain after finding out what happened to the girl she previously loved. She just wanted revenge, and she didn’t care enough to go to the corrupted police department even with all the evidence. She literally says “Rachel would have wanted us to do this. To get real justice...and revenge.”
As for convincing Chloe, she only actually LISTENS to Max when she talks about how Jefferson hurt HER. If you bring up anything else to Chloe she instantly goes back to “KILL” mode. Why only Max? Because Chloe actually gives a shit and loves Max. She drops her entire revenge quest over her best friend FOR MAX. Again, unhealthy relationship is NOT accurate.
I’d like to also respond to your original comment on this thread about Chloe, and quite frankly clear up exactl… [view original content]
I was one of the few people that did not hate the trailer. I was really digging the premise of having the two brothers on the run and there being multiple paths and all, that gameplay footage though... I wasn't having too much of a problem to it until that sudden, abrupt climax. Then there's how contrived and forced it all felt? Just... ugh. Did not sit well with me at all. And it seems like this game is committing the common mistake of expecting us to feel anything over the death of characters we knew for the total of 1 scene (or the "Mariana syndrome" as I like to call it). The gameplay just gave off a really bad vibe overall. Writing and pacing wise that is.
Also what is it with that price tag? Have they come out and said why this is so damn expensive?
One could say that Kenny and Chloe are almost the same character.
Except one of them is arguably still just a child with some serious untreated mental health problems (borderline personality disorder possibly), while another is a fully grown adult who has serious anger issues with a violent streak.
I don't hate Chloe, but I wouldn't want to be her friend in real life either. I'd advise her to get some counselling and do so some serious self-reflection without getting drugs involved.
Comments
what's his youtube channel?
it's near the end in two whales diner when everyone's there. she's sitting on the floor next to the front entrance. it's before you meet "evil max". or as i like to call her, "max".
idk. i thought it was fun and original. but like i said i don't play lots of games so maybe my expectations aren't as high as everyone else.
how could anyone possibly dislike chloe
I get why people might like her, but that doesn't change the fact that I simply don't. There were scenes where I felt bad or good for her, but she's still an asshole in my book.
She’s abusive, manipulative, controlling, reckless, entitled, moronic, self-centered, always blames others for her problems, has no respect for authority, hypocritical, a wannabe punk, and, well as GSSalvador said, an asshole.
Yeah, her father died, it sucks and left a traumatic impact on her, but she always uses this as a crutch, which she then uses to beat people over the head with until you feel bad for her. She constantly uses it as an excuse for why her life is so fucked up, rather than accept any personal responsibility for her actions. Maybe her life is so shitty because she is a shitty person who makes bad decisions, but that’s not what the game wants you to think, no it always has to be someone else’s fault, it can never be precious and “amaze balls” Chloe. She even has a line in the game, I believe in Episode 3, where she says she has to blame someone else because, otherwise, it’s her fault, and she says “Fuck that.”
Let’s look at a great example of a character who also lost a parent at an extremely young age, but turned that loss into a strength...Katara from Avatar: The Last Airbender. She lost her mother when she was 8, she was murdered when she lied to a Fire Nation soldier and said that she was the last remaining waterbender in the South Pole in order to protect Katara. All she has left of her is her necklace, which she continuously wears throughout the show because of her love for her. However, while Chloe went down a path of rebelliousness and self-pity, Katara literally went in the opposite path. Her mother is a constant source of determination and motivation for her, and while she does reference it a lot throughout the show, unlike Chloe, it’s never seen as a crutch or an excuse. She becomes a more compassionate, loving, nurturing, and caring person because of her loss, and she was always the most hopeful and optimistic person in the show, being a constant sourced strength and guidance for the group, even in their worst times. Her passion, comes from loss. There’s only one real time you see how her mother’s death has a negative impact on her character, but that’s only when she has the opportunity to confront her mother’s killer and years worth of pent up hatred comes out in the form of revenge, but it’s tackled by the writers in a much more mature and complex manner than anything LiS ever did with Chloe. Yeah, the show meant for kids had smarter writing and better character growth than LiS, I said it and I’ll defend it to the death.
Katara is the antithesis to Chloe, Katara is an example of what people like Chloe should strive to be. But all I here is how “sympathetic” Chloe is and how we should feel bad for her, and that just gives her more of an excuse to act the way she does throughout the game. Chloe is a horrible person, I’m sorry, but you can’t change my mind on that.
yeah, I can agree with that?, but thats why I like her. She’s the perfect best friend imo
She has to?? FUCK the “authority”.
David’s a home wrecker who’s thinks bosses everyone around and thinks Chloe and Joyce are supposed to follow his orders. Principal Wells was corrupt. I love the fact she that she doesn’t fold for anyone
The thing is that while David's actions are, at best, questionable, and at worst, abusive, what we saw was an actual and genuine desire to help Chloe. He's not innocent and has problems, but he had good intentions, and he's certainly not a home wrecker. And despite how Chloe treats him, you can see he still cares for her, you see that in BtS, and you also see that in Episode 5 of the original when he learns about Chloe's death. He wanted Chloe to get her life back on track and hold herself accountable, he just has a really bad way of showing it (setting up cameras throughout the house).
But him and Wells aren't the only two people I'm referring to when I say "authority," another person is her own mom, who also wants what's best for Chloe but does it more through love and compassion, rather than David's pushing and demanding. And yet, despite what she does for her, Chloe doesn't listen to her as well. You have all these people that are, in some way, trying to help Chloe, and she continues to shut them out or refuses to listen to them, and that's where my hatred for her starts.
THIS. The nightmare sequence was long and added fuck all to anything, and just made me dislike Max more.
I'm expecting it to have less fans because I think the new characters and story are going to be more forgettable than Max and Chloe, better or worse.
All I expect is for them to finally stick the landing on the ending after their two previous failures for them.
To be fair, the last ending we got in terms of the franchise was from a different dev.
I don't wanna say BTS was the ANF of LiS, but......yeah.....
The point is that Chloe is flawed and damaged, because she clings permanently to the past. Even her helping Max discover her powers, and her attempting to find Rachel, is motivated by the desire to feel loved, accepted and stable. The reason she's a great character is because she evolves to realise that her behavior is selfish and destructive, and therefore sacrifices herself for all of Arcadia Bay by telling Max to go back in time, stop her from ever knowing Max after she left for Seattle, or getting closure on Rachel, to save everyone else and get justice for the girls affected by Nathan and Jefferson.
Chloe is broken, selfish and flawed, but also endearing, and selfless in the end.
In terms of being compared to the original? Absolutely. But at least BtS didn’t make Chloe fat and have her hang herself because she was pregnant with Luk- whoops wrong character.
Is it though? Are you so sure that's her reasoning, or is it because she just wants people to feel bad for her. I recall a great reading from Dr. Jordan Peterson's book "12 Rules For Life," and in Chapter 3, in a section entitled "Rescuing The Damned," he talks about those who help others in need (Max), but also those who are at the bottom (Chloe). Here's an edited part in particular that I love:
But let's go with your idea that she wants to be accepted and loved, the question is does having that type of reason justify horrible behavior? For example, you have a picture of Marlon as your profile picture. We understand his reasoning and the external conditions as to why he did what he did. It was an attempt to save everyone else at the boarding school, that he would give up two people and save several. We also understand that he's a kid with a lot of pressure on his shoulders to keep things running, despite low food, a shrinking safe zone, and dealing with several losses. But does that excuse his actions in the end? My answer is no. Even though you understand why he did what he did, or why Chloe acts the way she does, that does not mean you have to approve or even support their actions. You can still understand them, but also criticize them and believe that their viewpoint, or their actions, are morally wrong and only going to cause more harm to themselves than good.
When she tells you to go back and time and let her die, sure, but if you choose to rip up the photo, which is what she didn't want you to do, she doesn't seem to care at all that Max just condemned everyone, including her mother, to death. They also drive through the destroyed town and numerous dead bodies as they ride off into the sunset together.
I also have a couple more passages from Dr. Peterson's book that I think not only beautifully describe how bad Chloe is, but how unhealthy her friendship/relationship with Max is as well.
Since I don’t have enough time to reply to this new glorious message of yours right now, I’ll just respond to the previous comparison you had of Katara as short and quickly as I can.
Chloe lost her entire support group with the death of her dad, and Max moving away. She didn't have a great relationship with Joyce, and it appears Joyce didn't know how to help Chloe. Instead Joyce focused on herself, the only person she knew how to help.
You'll have no disagreement from me that Chloe has some severe flaws. Some, if not many, of her flaws are her armor to protect herself from being hurt (again).
Ultimately, comparing one person against another is futile. Just because Katara was able to go in one direction is not proof that Chloe could do the same. Katara as an example is not an indictment of Chloe. People, situations, and life are not that black and white.
I’ll be back soon(ish) to respond to your recent comment.
And immediately following her mother's death, Katara’s father literally left her with only her brother in the South Pole as he went to go fight in the war. Sokka didn't have a strong relationship with their mother, so Katara, also, had no support group. And again, she still managed to be the most optimistic, caring, and loving person in the show (or at least one of them, the title for loving/caring might have to go to Iroh).
I'm not exactly sure what makes you think that. I do recall Joyce having a self help book I think at one point, but that's the only thing from your post I got. Everything else I don't remember ever being hinted at in the game regarding Joyce not focusing on Chloe.
Actually it kind of is. Both are stories of struggles after losing a loved one and parent, but both diverged in how they responded to tragedy. You say how life isn't black and white, and you're right about that, but life is filled with people who have been moved, touched, or influenced by the actions of someone that have caused them to follow in their footsteps or live up to their standards. Chloe never sought out a person that could help her, or she rejected anyone who actually did try to help. One rose above their hardships, while one never even attempted, and when one person is able to do so, it does inspire others to emulate that path to success.
Forgive me if im being a tad bit critical, but I just have to point out what I’ve gotten from you in these posts in terms of logic. Alright, let’s start.
So, Chloe is a terrible person, because after losing her dad, her best friend, her mom to David because BtS and LiS have shown how Joyce was either passive when it came to Chloe vs David or was just outright on David’s side, her other best friend over the course of five years, she didn't get a 16-hour-a-day job as a mechanic, worked her ass off until she became like a half-owner of the most premier body shop in all of Arcadia Bay, found a good man there and had like five kids with him by the time she was 25, all the while supporting her mom and feeding the unemployed dock workers? Oh, shit, and don't forget she "has no respect for authority."
But wait, there's more. She's also a terrible CHARACTER for the same reasons, because every CHARACTER who lost their parents needs to react to the loss in exactly the same way. And not just any way, mind you, they all must act the way Katara does, because who in their right mind would want to write, read or play a game with a character that's in any way different from her?
yah but it wasn't just her father dying. it was her only friend max abandoning her then joyce hooking up with an assholehead and basically trying to erase william from their house. then later in LiS she's dealing with the whole rachel problem. chloe has serious abandonment issues. it's p obvious in certain moments when it comes out. like getting angry over rachel and thinking she left her like max and learning about her relationship with frank. she feels totally alone.
chloe is very sweet and caring on the inside but like a lot of ppl trying to deal with those kinda issues, she has like a tough exterior to hide all her inner pain. look how she breaks down in the junkyard with rachel in BTS when she's describing how lonely she is and then rachel turning around and leaving. her entire story is just so heartbreaking i don't see how anyone can blame her for how she acts.
I'm not saying Chloe hasn't endured hardships and tragedy, what I'm saying is that she uses it more as a crutch and refuses to move on, rather than as a strength and rise above it. What I'm saying is that if you constantly claim victimhood and blame everything wrong with you on someone or something else, you're already setting yourself up for future failure, and thus, repeat the same endless cycle of victimization and blame. No one wants to be friends with the person who complains all the time, who has that nihilistic outlook on the world, who will attack you if you don't 100% support them, who guilts you at almost every turn, who controls you like a puppet into doing her bidding, and so on and so forth. And when a person does those things, yeah, it does become a bit challenging to feel sympathetic for them because they can't cope in a way that is healthy, and when people do come along to try and help her, she shuts them out so that she can continue to complain about how no one wants to help her or won't just let her be the sullen and angsty teenager she is.
I don't even know what you're trying to say or get across with this. At what point did I say or imply any of these things? This entire point here is irrational, so either explain yourself more or stop trying to insist that this was in any way shape or form what I was saying.
Again, not what I'm saying. It seems as if you're entire argument is either twisting my words and argument, or making stuff up, which is not how you have a reasonable exchange of ideas or a debate. No, not everyone has, is, or will deal with loss in the same way, my point in comparing Katara and Chloe was to draw a contrast between two similar situations and how both of them responded in different ways. Yes I do find Katara's path the more favorable, the one people who have suffered loss and hardship should actually look to as to how one should cope, and Chloe is the unhealthy and damaging one that people should avoid. That was the point of my argument, and hence why I also referenced those passages from Dr. Peterson's book (which I also see you failed to argue against). I'm not saying Chloe wasn't a compelling character in LiS, she was, definitely the most well developed character in the game. But compelling does not equal likable and sympathetic.
So....many.....words.......trying.....not......to lose.......interest....
I understand why she acts, but I also don't think it's the right way to go about it and she's causing herself more harm than good when she acts in this manner. And even if we understand why people do things, that doesn't automatically make them right. A wrong deed is still wrong, even if there are reasons behind it.
And at the end of the day, when we constantly try to blame others for how things are, it ultimately denies personal accountability and responsibility. It implies that our lives are not in our own hands, denying ourselves of our independence and ability to live out our lives. We are all responsible for our own actions, and while tragedy may have impacted our lives, it does not and should not excuse reprehensible actions. To reference a quote from earlier:
The whole “Chloe working a 16-hour-a-day job” rant was mostly just me exaggerating about what I feel like you would do with her character if you were the writer. I read that quote you sent from that book but I still don’t quite understand where you’re coming from with it. I don’t see Max and Chloe’s relationship as “unhealthy”. Complicated is a better word, but not unhealthy.
I like how you describe Chloe as being all these terrible things, but you never bring up her good qualities and how she tries to make amends with her flawed traits.
It's not that she's liked because she's a "terrible person". No one likes a terrible person. I actually hated her for the first two episodes myself. But Chloe redeems herself and grows a lot throughout the 5 episodes, and that's one of the reasons I like her.
Did you pay attention to Chloe’s character in episodes 3-5? Do you remember when Chloe apologized for being a bitch when Max took Kate's call? Or when instead of throwing a fit when Max suggested getting David's help she actually went with it? Or when she asked to die so the city could be saved (which you kinda just glossed over in your response)? I ask because you mentioned you hated the game, and it's common for people to just power through it without exploring or caring about stuff. I know you have like a playthrough on your channel, but I can’t stand watching it because it’s just a bunch of whining. I had a friend (who also hated the game) that actually kept checking his phone during dialogues, which made him miss a big part of the game’s overall experience.
You said you hated the game ever since the first episode. I think maybe that’s the problem? You constantly went into every episode thinking it would stay the same pile of shit as the first episode, and (in your eyes), it did.
For their friendship, I’m often drawn to this particular quote.
I think dream Max in Episode 5 also summed up her and Chloe’s friendship well, she constantly uses Max as a puppet, a tool for her own ends with little regard for Max herself. And then she guilts Max constantly to try and earn the sympathy points and have Max continue her “pointless martyrdom.” Max, often times, is too weak willed and indecisive, not only silently encouraging Chloe’s behavior, which as I mentioned I do not believe is in Chloe’s best interest, but she lets Chloe call the shots, such as not letting them just go to the police despite overwhelming evidence because “fuck the police” and “the Prescott’s own them,” even though they have definitive proof of wrongdoing. In the end, for neither of them it's particularly good or healthy to stay in this friendship, because Chloe isn't going to change from blaming everyone else for her problems, and Max is just going to keep encouraging and promoting this behavior from her, that's why I see it as unhealthy.
That's because I can't recall any times throughout the game where she "makes amends with her flawed traits." And if she does, it's immediately counteracted by her showing off another huge flaw or doing something horrible.
Yes I did.
Which made no sense for her to get mad over to begin with, considering how she called on a cell phone and Max could take it anywhere, but it was needed to set up conflict. Also, Max never tells Chloe that the call is from a friend who's extremely depressed and was, much like Chloe, drugged, and contemplating suicide. I don't expect Chloe to know that on her own, but I do expect the game to allow us to convey that information to her, so that's more of me criticizing the situation and how it was presented in the first place. But onto your point, I also remember her wanting to steal money from Blackwell's handicap fund in order to pay back her drug dealer.
But again, Chloe initially refused to go to the police because "fuck them" in Episode 4. And despite the fact that Max has time powers and she's coming to her in tears telling her not to go in to the party, that it was Jefferson and not Nathan, etc., Chloe STILL doesn't listen and requires huge amounts of convincing before she agrees to go to David. She didn't even trust Max at all, because she's so set in her ways that, when clear evidence is right in front of her, she still took all that convincing. Plus, I also remember her throwing a fit and blaming her own father for dying in Episode 3, once again refusing to shoulder any of the blame for her messed up life on herself.
And then when Max chooses to tear up the photo and give up Arcadia Bay, Chloe's response is to do nothing, which kind of throws all of her pleading to save the city, her mother, and even David, out the window. Yeah, if you choose to sacrifice Chloe, it does give her one good deed, and I can respect that, but when you see the alternate version and see her and Max driving through the destroyed Arcadia Bay and numerous dead bodies, riding away together, you wonder what just happened? To me, it just seems like it completely undoes everything Chloe just said.
Regardless of whether it was the original LiS or BtS, I went in with the same mentality and approach as I do with Telltale games. I look at everything, talk to everyone, pay attention to all the dialogues, etc. Despite my hatred for the game, I paid attention, I can't think at one point I ever checked my phone or distracted myself from the game. The only things I didn't really do was when you had the option for Max/Chloe to sit down or stand in a certain area and listen to their internal monologues. Other than that, I explored, I talked, and I didn't power through, and the reason I did that was because I wanted the full experience, to see if there was something I missed from watching others play it, or that I skipped out on some big thing in regards to one of the characters that would maybe cause me to rethink my view on them, but I didn't really get anything. As hard as it may be for you to believe this, I did go into these games with an open mind, I rarely go into something ready to love/hate it, that goes against everything I believe in. I'll praise something when it deserves to be praised, and criticize when it deserves to be criticized (hence why I've been spending the last 3 months working on a review series for criticizing ANF despite loving TWD S1, S2, and TFS).
Again, no I didn't because that goes against my principles. Yes I do often joke about how something that has the LiS tag on it that it will suck, but that's all it is, jokes. I do try to approach everything with an open mind, and I don't let my emotions try and get in the way of my judgment and reasoning. When I first heard about the game and read the concept, I was interested, especially since it was influenced in the style of Telltale, it was only after seeing it and how flawed it was that my dislike for it grew, but I didn't hate it from the start. I remember these were my initial thoughts on the episodes from the original game when they came out:
E1: I thought it was pretty disappointing, we didn't really get what was advertised, a lot of the dialogue was pretty cringy, the characters didn't seem all that good, and the lip syncing was abysmal. However, it is the first episode and it does still have promise, I'll give it a pass for just trying to set things up, and hopefully Episode 2 will do more to move the plot forward.
E2: That...somehow ended up being worse than the last episode. It just felt like it was more of the same that I criticized about the first episode, only this time it felt like it dragged on even longer. And despite being advertised on it's mystery, there's not a lot of detective work going on, and the rewind power is either being misused or not explored enough.
E3: The first half is honestly really good and what I expected from this game, good detective work, puzzle solving that relies on my time powers, some decent character development, hopefully the rest of the episode continues on this path. (plays the rest) And it falls right back into the same old problems. Definitely not as bad as the previous episodes, but I still don't think it's good, but the ending was a cool twist.
E4: I actually really liked this episode, this is what I thought LiS was going to be. The beginning segment in the alternate timeline was very well written, more crime solving, and Chloe's discovery of Rachel may just be the best scene of the game. Maybe if it ends on a high note, this series can be pretty good.
E5: Just...what the hell was that?
And I'll even say that, despite not liking what I saw in the gameplay, I do think S2 of LiS has some promise. But that's all this series seems to be, a bunch of promise, that is either squandered or poorly executed.
Chloe is like Kenny from Twd. You either love or hate them.
i she inside the diner? dangit i didn't notice her.
Naah man don't compare Chloe vs Kenny. Kenny is like drunk, angry, garbage person, you just ruined my view of Chloe. She is unique and special character that we at least most of us love ( i hope )
why didn't you like E5? it concluded E4
me too. i thought it was ok.
me too, i thought chloe was ok. like she was rebellious of the world because her father died, and she was left hanging by her childhood friend-i mean i might feel the same if i only had 1 friend & that friend stops replying & i'm introvert. i mean, compared to Katara, Chloe is weaker. but Avatar is a story of war while LiS is a Highschool emo. But then again, i don't like her doing drugs tho. and what Evan said about Chloe wasting her intelligence i'd have to agree.
Yeah, but here's the thing, I really liked BTS, better than LIS itself in a lot of regards, the problem is the ending feels like it's just realizing it has to end and squanders some interesting plot points. Regardless of whether or not this was a different developer, as Dontnod let them work on their series meaning they had to trust them to give something of similar quality, which I felt they delivered on up until the ending, it's not a good pattern for two games in a series to have endings that aren't well regarded.
Fair points. The Kate situation with the phone in all honesty was pretty stupid. Keep in mind however that Chloe at the time of the party was literally fuming and had the words “KILL” in her brain after finding out what happened to the girl she previously loved. She just wanted revenge, and she didn’t care enough to go to the corrupted police department even with all the evidence. She literally says “Rachel would have wanted us to do this. To get real justice...and revenge.”
As for convincing Chloe, she only actually LISTENS to Max when she talks about how Jefferson hurt HER. If you bring up anything else to Chloe she instantly goes back to “KILL” mode. Why only Max? Because Chloe actually gives a shit and loves Max. She drops her entire revenge quest over her best friend FOR MAX. Again, unhealthy relationship is NOT accurate.
I’d like to also respond to your original comment on this thread about Chloe, and quite frankly clear up exactly how you’re interpreting her character. In my opinion, you are interpreting her character ENTIRELY WRONG.
“She’s abusive”
Abusive is patently absurd, she is the one being regularly abused.
“manipulative”
Manipulative I will give you, in some cases she really plays off Max's guilt. But with the caveat that it isn't deliberate or intentional manipulation, she is simply acting out of insecurity.
“controlling”
Yeah she is a bit controlling with Max. Like the earlier point though, it is merely a manifestation of learned insecurity. A couple of months being treated like an actual person will likely clear it up.
“reckless”
Fuck yes, she is very reckless. That’s what’s fun about her.
“entitled”
I can't really see entitled, at all.
“moronic”
Moronic? At this point you’re just insulting her.
“self-centered”
Self-centered, yes. A major character flaw which she overcomes over the course of the narrative.
“always blames others for her problems”
That's because more often then not other people are to blame for her problems. Yes, it's not a good thing that she refuses to take responsibility for her bad behaviour but ignoring the fact that this is a character who has been abused and marginalized for a third of her life isn't fair. Life shit on her so consistently that she lost the ability to distinguish between the consequences of her own shitty behaviour and life just taking another squat.
“has no respect for authority”
.......i'm sorry, this is supposed to be a bad thing? If I lived in Arcadia Bay I wouldn't respect authority either. The local creepy teenager who’s power hungry dad can order the cops away from the parties where he will be drugging high school girls isn’t exactly the people I would want to respect. If you’re talking about David and his “authority” as well as Blackwell’s staff, I’ll get into that later.
Authority should not always be respected, merely acknowledged.
“hypocritical”
Who the fuck isn't?
“a wannabe punk”
This is another one of those "fucking what?" points.
“and an asshole”
Eh, only to people being an asshole to her.
“Yeah, her father died, it sucks and left a traumatic impact on her, but she always uses this as a crutch, which she then uses to beat people over the head with until you feel bad for her. She constantly uses it as an excuse for why her life is so fucked up, rather than accept any personal responsibility for her actions. Maybe her life is so shitty because she is a shitty person who makes bad decisions, but that’s not what the game wants you to think, no it always has to be someone else’s fault, it can never be precious and “amaze balls” Chloe. She even has a line in the game, I believe in Episode 3, where she says she has to blame someone else because, otherwise, it’s her fault, and she says “Fuck that.” “
Okay, so you have completely and utterly failed to understand both Chloe's trauma and the games presentation of it.
Chloe's trauma is not "dead dad, time to be sad". It is life hitting you with one curve ball after another, never giving you time to recover and starting at your most vulnerable.
William's death was only the beginning of her life going to hell, and what prevented her from dealing with the other stuff, condemning her to a downward spiral.
The father who adored her died, followed immediately by the friend who had been as close as family her entire life leaving and not keeping in touch - abandoning her completely. In one week she lost two thirds of her support network.
But at least she still has her mother, right? Fun fact, when a couple's child dies it is very common for that couple's relationship to fall apart. The stress of grief hitting people in different ways drives them apart like very few things can. It is no surprise the same can happen with a parent and child after the death of the other parent. So William's death strains Chloe's relationship with her mother badly. But that isn't the end of the world, relationships get strained, with time, they can move past it.
Enter David. Two months after her husbands death Joyce meets and hits on David. Way too soon for Chloe to accept, so she immediately and completely rejects him. It is going to take a long time for Chloe to move past that rejection and accept that him as something her mother needs.
Or not, as it turns out. Because David is an abusive misogynist who belittles, mocks, insults and even physically assaults her. And when Chloe desperately needs her mother to kick him to the curb, Joyce does the exact opposite and spends years sometimes even enabling his abuse.
The only part of Chloe's support network that is not completely torn away is literally turned against her, keeping her in an abusive situation she has no escape from.
But life is more then the home, right? There have to be people outside her closest friends and family.
Well, she has just had to leave behind her peers in a normal school because her intelligence has won her a scholarship to an elite school - one filled with rich kids she feels uncomfortable around, at least three of whom are bullying her for coming from a poor family. (You’d know this if you played the beautiful and heartbreaking Farewell episode in BtS.)
The only friend she had from her old school who winds up going to her new school winds up exploiting her grief and loneliness to get her into bed, then when she starts pulling away because for some odd reason guys just aren't doing it for her he literally stalks and assaults her. (Eliot)
But a school is more then the other kids, right? There are the staff too. Like the Principal, who only cares about the status and funding of the school and literally goes looking for reasons to expel her, accusing her of things another student (a promising athlete who will bring in money.......) did and punishing her for deliberately giving another student the wrong answers while outright ignoring the plagiarizing student because unlike Chloe she is connected.
On top of all that, you can add in the stress of being gay and coming to terms with it in a rural town, but that’s more up to you.
So, school and social life are fucked. Good thing she managed to make one friend, right? Haha, no. Said friend - the only thing that kept Chloe from killing herself as her life fell apart, is abducted and murdered.
And then someone with the connections to order the police away from where he intends to kidnap teenage girls drugs, abducts and may have even attempted to rape Chloe - failing only because he under dosed her in response to accidentally overdosing her friend.
So yeah, you can't just boil all of that down "dead dad".
The Chloe we meet in the alternate timeline has been rendered quadriplegic, unable to move as she agonizingly inches towards an inevitable death - and she is still happier and more well adjusted then the Chloe in the main timeline. That is how much main Chloe has suffered.
Sorry for the wall of text.
TLDR: You have completely misinterpreted Chloe’s character.
if you understand why she acts like that then how can you hate her for it? of course people going through all that drama won't make the best decisions all the time. esp if everyone they're closest to keeps disappearing.
yeh it's kinda easy to miss since everyone you walk next to in the diner starts talking to max.
she's a bit complicated. sure she's smart and everything but she has like no motivation to apply herself because she feels rejected or forgotten by everyone. there's a kinda self-harm thing to what she's doing. like a lot of people who go through hard times like that go into a downward spiral. like not so much being addicted to drugs or anything but addicted to the self-destructive aspect of it.
Because understanding why a person does something is not the same as excusing them for their actions. Numerous characters in fiction can have understandable or even sympathetic reasons for doing what they do, it doesn't magically make it right or mean that I have to agree with it. Me saying I understand them is saying I get their line of reasoning, I just don't agree with the conclusion they reach.
How much longer can we excuse Chloe for her actions? I get it, her dad died, her best friend left, her new best friend disappeared. I know this sounds heartless, but sometimes it needs to be said, how much longer can we tally her decision making up to this stuff and not up to her own recklessness and immoral character? When do we say, "I get that things haven't been easy for you, but at some point, you need to accept responsibility, move on, and learn to live a good and healthy life."
If there's one thing I can't stand, it's people either making excuses for themselves, or making excuses for someone else. And that' at the end of the day, is why I can't stand Chloe, she's full of excuses and surrounds herself with people that continue to excuse her behavior, which in turn, has not allowed her to grow and accept everything that has happened. We are responsible for our own actions, and that's a concept Chloe fails to realize.
Eh, I like walls of text, it allows me to think deeper about the argument at hand.
It's certainly understandable that she would want revenge, what person in her shoes would not want retribution for something like that. Her decision is still stupid as if she did go and kill Nathan, even if she had a reasoning to do so, she still would have been arrested and jailed for murder, and chances are Max would also go down with her as being an accomplice. Neither of them really thought this thing through or of the repercussions this would clearly have. No law enforcement anywhere would say "Hmm, you killed that kid in cold blood, but you did it because you found your dead girlfriend, guess we'll let you off the hook." That's not how the justice system works.
And as much as you're tired of it, I have to draw the comparison again because both characters went through this. There's an entire episode in Avatar of Katara going on a revenge quest to find the person who killed her mother. It leads her down a dark path, attacking her friends, insulting her brother, committing heinous actions, all leading up to her confrontation with the man who killed her. However, despite going into the dark abyss and everything that happened up until then...she doesn't do it, she spares him and walks away. In the end, while her desire for revenge and "real justice" was strong, her own moral principles won out in the end. A great line from her is, "I wanted to do it. I wanted to take out all my anger at him, but I couldn't. I don't know if it's because I'm too weak to do it, or because I'm strong enough not to." The latter is the real reason, in the end, her own moral principles and convictions won, and despite her anger, she knew she couldn't go through with it because, in the end, it wasn't going to bring her mother back, and while she would feel a sense of relief in the moment, in the long run, it would cause her great pain and regret.
The point still stands that Chloe should still be listening to Max, the one with the ability to rewind time, without needing all that extra convincing. When the girl with time travel powers comes to you and says "Hey listen, it's not Nathan responsible, it's Mr. Jefferson," you listen to them because they probably know what they're talking about.
I'm not the only one arguing that it's unhealthy, the other person who says it is, well, Max herself. In the dream sequence, the dream Max is literally spelling out all the bad things Chloe has done and how their relationship is unhealthy and basically "Stockholm syndrome." The game is the one saying it, I'm just choosing to further analyze it.
Abuse is not just limited to physical abuse (getting slapped by David), it can come in many forms: mental, emotional, verbal, etc. Her form of abuse is not physical, but it does come through manipulation and guilting towards Max. And since you've already given me manipulating, I rest my case.
She literally shoots herself and puts her life in danger by laying down on train tracks. Listen, I like the sight of Chloe getting shot as much as the next person, but how is that fun?
Still not seeing it. Having one moment at the end of telling Max to go back and kill her, and then immediately acting like it was no big deal if you choose the other option is not really overcoming your self-centeredness.
If you continue to come up with excuses for bad behavior, you deny them their own independence and agency for making decisions. Suddenly it's no longer "their decision" and if that's the case, then we are denying them their freedom and autonomy. Life hasn't been fair to Chloe, I've never once denied that notion, but again, as I mentioned to someone else, how long can we keep making excuses for her as a means to justify her actions, because I feel as if that point has long been crossed. I can't blame the tragic loss of a loved one from several years ago for my actions today, no one is, or should, buy that.
YES IT'S A BAD THING! I'm not saying people in power are by their nature good, but there is a certain level of respect that is required. You work at your job, you may hate your boss, but you still have to respect them, you can't just go and do whatever you want because "Fuck him and his authority." If you do, you'll be fired. I'm not making things political here, but God knows there were things I disagreed and hated about President Obama, that being said, I always respected the office of the Presidency and would, if I were to meet him, treat him with respect and dignity, despite my ill feelings about him. Whether you like it or not, there is a level of respect that is expected for certain offices and positions, even if you dislike the person who holds it, it does not give you permission to go ahead and do whatever you want because you don't like them.
Okay, fair enough. But when either someone else or I personally call out my hypocrisy, I try to think critically about it and remedy it. Chloe doesn't really appear to do that.
No, I do understand the trauma, what I'm saying is that it has gone beyond the point where we can keep excusing her actions as being under the guise of her father dying several years ago and she isn't responsible for them as a result.
Chloe is not the only person to have curveballs thrown at them in their life. Real people have as well, and some of them do go down the same path as Chloe, others use it as a motivator. Life is filled with hardship, moments that will knock you on your feet and kick you while you're down, it is up to you in how you respond to that and whether you choose to be the victim of it, or get back up and try again. No one that has ever been successful has never had to deal with the pain of failure and struggle, the reason why they're successful is because they refuse to give up after failing.
Another great example is Clarence Thomas. Born dirt poor in a small Georgia town, a house fire at the age of 7 made him and his entire family homeless, and even before that, his mother struggled to put food on the table to feed him and his siblings. When he was 2, his father ran out on his family. And to make things worse...he was an African American who's ancestors were slaves, growing up in the deep south during the 1940's, 50's, and 60's. He cites his grandfather as the greatest person he has ever known because he taught him the value of hard work and self-reliance. Now, he is one of 9 members on the US Supreme Court. He built himself up from literally nothing, with little to no access to many luxuries we have today, and rose to prominence. His life was far more of a struggle and uphill battle than Chloe, who, while not living luxuriously, had a good education at Blackwell Academy and the memories of a loving father, but threw her opportunity out the window because of her own claim of victimhood.
Physically assaulting I'll give you, but even that's determinant I believe, he doesn't hit her in all outcomes of the game. And yes, his words and actions can often go too far, but here's one thing you're denying or not interpreting, the fact that David, despite his shortcomings and faults, actually wanted what was best for Chloe. A bad way of showing it, yes, but rooted beneath that exterior was a person that wanted her to succeed, wanted her to mature and accept responsibility, to apply herself, and wanted to get her life back on track. A man who didn't care for her wouldn't have reacted the way he did when he learns about Chloe's death at the hands of Jefferson.
She didn't have to go, she could have turned their offer down or left at anytime and go back to her old school. And I went to a private high school, which was dominated by many affluent and well off families, while I come from a more middle class background. You think I didn't feel out of place hearing about some of these people's lives? Of course I did. You think I wasn't bullied, whether there or when I was in public school? Of course I was. But I didn't let it bother me, I took it in stride and focused on my work.
I'm...not contending that, Eliot was an asshat and essentially the Warren of Before The Storm. Hated him throughout the game, just a completely worthless character.
I'm not exactly sure when that was ever a major thing we saw Chloe grasping with. We see her express curiosity when she starts thinking of a female character from Blade Runner, but that's the only real example I can think of of her "coming to terms." That was never really a major reason behind anything she does. I also just plain don't care about a character's sexuality. I've said it before and I'll say it again, I don't care about WHAT a person is, I care about WHO a person is, and being gay is not WHO a person is. And considering how this game takes place in Oregon, one of the most left leaning states in the country, in a time where people have been more accepting and tolerating than ever before in human history, I don't think you even have to factor that in.
Whoa, where did that come from, you better have some strong evidence to back that up, because suicidal was never one of the things I got from Chloe's character. Wanting to run away and leave Arcadia Bay behind, yeah, but not suicidal.
Again, I recognize it's more than just dead dad, but the reason why I put a lot of emphasis on that is because, well, Chloe puts a lot of emphasis on that. She always goes back to that moment as the one that changed her life. Everything else has had an impact, sure, but that's the biggest one. And again, while some of what you said may be true, I find it hard to excuse many of her actions throughout the game just because of that.
Life is hard, life is cruel, life is unfair, life will chew you up and spit you out, Chloe isn't special because of that, but she thinks that she is.
Do you make excuses for Nathan as well, considering his somewhat abusive and horrible home life? Will you go to the same lengths to defend Nathan's actions as you will for Chloe, that he isn't responsible for them because, despite how wealthy he is, he's also been a victim of abuse from an uncaring father who puts pressure on him all the time and doesn't help his sons obvious mental problems.
I was one of the few people that did not hate the trailer. I was really digging the premise of having the two brothers on the run and there being multiple paths and all, that gameplay footage though... I wasn't having too much of a problem to it until that sudden, abrupt climax. Then there's how contrived and forced it all felt? Just... ugh. Did not sit well with me at all. And it seems like this game is committing the common mistake of expecting us to feel anything over the death of characters we knew for the total of 1 scene (or the "Mariana syndrome" as I like to call it). The gameplay just gave off a really bad vibe overall. Writing and pacing wise that is.
Also what is it with that price tag? Have they come out and said why this is so damn expensive?
One could say that Kenny and Chloe are almost the same character.
Except one of them is arguably still just a child with some serious untreated mental health problems (borderline personality disorder possibly), while another is a fully grown adult who has serious anger issues with a violent streak.
I don't hate Chloe, but I wouldn't want to be her friend in real life either. I'd advise her to get some counselling and do so some serious self-reflection without getting drugs involved.