Dontnod, I am disappoint... *Life is Strange spoilers inside*

[ninja666]

So, some time ago I bought the whole season of Life is Strange. Up until the fourth episode it's been one of the best story-based adventure games I've played. It managed to be the thing I was looking for for a really long time - a game with a story that tackles really sensitive topics in a mature way and does it well. Life is Strange did that and I thought I finally found that Holy Grail of video games. Then Episode 5 happened...

To say I'm disappointed is putting it mildly. I've never seen a game crash and burn so hard in my life. What happened Dontnod? Did you get your... ehkhem... less talented writers to work on EP5 or something? Because, let's be honest, EP5 was terrible - none (literally none) of your choices mattered in the end, all of the emotional, mature drama was gone and what we got was a disjointed mess of creepy fetish fuel, Twister (you know, that terrible tornado movie from the 90s), and a way too heavy inspiration by Konami's P.T.

I have to admit, however, that the nightmare section was pretty creative and had me question whether or not the game's story was suddenly going to turn into a decent, Silent Hill-esque psychological horror. Too bad the potential was wasted by making it a simple "it was just a dream" and going with the cliche ending that literally everybody predicted when the EP4 came out (and in case of some even earlier).

I really thought you were more creative than that and you actually came up with something that would be so touching and emotional it will make me cry. That I'll have to make a really tough decision at the very end. Instead I got a choice whether to save a single character I don't give two shits about, or save the town, with thousands of people in it, from a big-ass tornado. That choice was so black and white it puts Bioware to shame. And after 4 episodes filled with ambiguous choices that made me question my morality numerous times... Why did you do this to us, Dontnod? Why?

One thing is sure - if a season 2 of this game ever comes out, I'm going to extra careful with my decision about buying it because I don't trust them anymore.

Is anyone here as disappointed as I am and wants to leave their thoughts on the matter? Go ahead, this thread's for you.

 

[Kingjackl]

To be honest, I though the nightmare bit kind of dragged it down for me. It started out creepy, the PT bits were interesting, but it really lost me when we got to the forced stealth section. I feel like that bit made up nearly a third of the runtime.

It became really disjointed in this episode. Up until then, the story had been fairly grounded, but when Max starts bouncing around the different realities I got a bit lost. I thought things had come back to Earth once you were in the reality where you help David fight Jefferson*, then go on to explore the ruined town, but that gets undone by the final choice. Either all the people you took the time to interact with and save in that section die anyway, or they're never put in danger to begin with. I knew the realism that made the series great had to end eventually given the supernatural element, but I'm a bit disappointed how episode 5 went completely off the rails almost from the beginning and didn't really get back on. I was hoping the alternate timelines would be a fleeting thing that we learn important lessons from, like the one in episode 4. Instead it turned into Groundhog Day without the happy ending.

Speaking of which, I liked the final choice, but it didn't hit me as hard as I thought it would. I kind of saw it coming, which is maybe why I wasn't as blown away. Oh, it was a hard decision to make, but it didn't reduce me to tears like the final choices in both the Walking Dead games did. Maybe it's because I picked the ending that basically undid the entire series. It was the right choice to make (though 48% of people when I played it disagreed, which is surprising to me), but not as narratively satisfying.

But you know what, I'm still glad I played it. Life as Strange on the whole ended up being very flawed, with only 3 & 4 being truly great episodes in my mind, but it was unique, I cared for the characters, and the standout moments made it all worthwhile.

*Can I just say, that scene was bullshit. Took me dozens of retries before I noticed the cable. How does a trained ex-soldier and security guard with prior warning get outdrawn and beaten by a fucking photography teacher?

 

[BloatedGuppy]

The "David and Jefferson fight" scene almost single handedly ruined the episode for me. So twitchy, so fiddly, so much counter-intuitive rewinding going on. It's one of those truly awkward moments in these story based episode games where game play tries to assert itself in a really obtrusive way and absolutely BUTCHERS the pacing.

That said, I thought it was a good denouement to an excellent game, ASSUMING you made the "correct" choice. I watched both endings. There's clearly one canon ending. And given I found the final decision to be wrenching/difficult (albeit with a clear "paragon" choice to be made), it's unfortunate that they didn't give both outcomes equal attention.

To the charge of "your choices don't matter"...same thing was leveled at TellTale's games, most notably with Walking Dead. They do matter. Your choices ARE THE GAME. That's you role-playing Max. That's you thinking through her decisions, and choosing how your interactions with people shake out. I'll never understand people who anticipate hundreds of outcomes as determined by wildly branching narratives. The game would be thirteen minutes long. I've yet to play a game with a multitude of outcomes where those outcomes weren't A) shallow, or entirely text based B) barely differentiated C) the game itself was greatly truncated/largely experimental. A game like Life is Strange, which was heavily scripted throughout, was always going to drive towards a very particular set of conclusions.

Amazed that the Chloe/Arcadia Bay split was SO even, given the ramifications of the latter choice.

Anyway. Fantastic game. Really enjoyed it. Sad it's over.

 

[ninja666]

To the charge of "your choices don't matter"...same thing was leveled at TellTale's games, most notably with Walking Dead. They do matter. Your choices ARE THE GAME. That's you role-playing Max. That's you thinking through her decisions, and choosing how your interactions with people shake out. I'll never understand people who anticipate hundreds of outcomes as determined by wildly branching narratives. The game would be thirteen minutes long. I've yet to play a game with a multitude of outcomes where those outcomes weren't A) shallow, or entirely text based B) barely differentiated C) the game itself was greatly truncated/largely experimental. A game like Life is Strange, which was heavily scripted throughout, was always going to drive towards a very particular set of conclusions.

The thing is, that in case of TWD it didn't matter because even though your choices didn't matter in the end, the ending itself was satisfying. It was such a great conclusion that you knew was inevitable because the game was forcing that thought on you from the beginning of episode 5 basically, and yet it still made you cry like a little ***** because it was so well executed. In case of LiS, though, you feel like you were insulted by the fact that those choices didn't matter because there was no significant addressing to them throughout the entire thing. Not to mention the endings were completely anticlimactic, predictable, and generally unsatisfying (in a bad way; yes, and ending can be "unsatisfying" in a good way, look at Silent Hill 2, TWD, or Dark Souls for example) because no matter what you chose, you felt like you were getting a middle finger from the developers because of the sheer stupidity of every ending.

And as for the second part - Silent Hill games have done that "your choices affect the ending" thing for years and they did fine, so your argument is invalid.

 

[Kae]

At least Tales from Borderlands had a good ending.

It was looking like a very good ending but there is an optional thing in there that pissed me off and I had to quit for today because I don't feel like dealing with that choice at all.

Spoiler: Tales from the Borderlands

FUCK CLAPTRAP, he was never funny and he is one of the most annoying characters ever, just fuck you clap trap.

OT: I thought it was OK, but to be fair I wasn't really expecting much from Life is Strange so the bits that were good were pretty cool and it still had good music and atmosphere, but yeah it wasn't the best ending ever and I found it strange they didn't decide to be a bit more pretentious with that ending considering how much of the game was about art and how much they mention that word, but I guess since they kinda seem like ironic hipsters it does make sense that they were too self aware to really go out with deeper ending I guess.

 

[Kae]

-snip-

I honestly don't know why you decided to suddenly turn your post from being constructive and reasonably critical into being a sarcastic douche. I had low expectations for Life is Strange, too, and I'm aware of its self-awareness, too, but I honestly think they managed to create a really good, even if a bit flawed, very mature drama with almost no pretentiousness in it, which surprised me fierce because I really rarely see things like this achieved in games, so it just makes me wonder why did they fuck up EP5 so much? And to tell you right away - I'm 100% sure it wasn't because of the reason you've given.

Well it wan't intentional to be a sarcastic douche, that is just my honest opinion[footnote]To be fair being a sarcastic douche is one of my core personality traits so it's not like I take offence to it.[/footnote] but you know it's a bit weird like they were trying to come off as hipsters but at the same time they kept pointing it out in a slightly negative light which kinda weirded me out, why not just own it?

You know like the Scott Pilgrim comics and movie, they had no problems with the fact that they were hipster media, instead Life is Strange just sorta points it out and says "Hipsters sure are pretentious" despite the fact that they are going for that style and being a bit more of what they called pretentious might have the work they were doing, you know I'm not saying pretentious hipster style is bad, it's what I played that game for but the game itself wasn't comfortable with being that with how much they mocked it and at the end decided on the most obvious ending rather than come up with something creative, perhaps for fear of being called pretentious hipsters?

I don't know that's just what popped into my head when I decided to type that post.

Also I wasn't saying the game was bad, I just didn't expect much from it because even when it when it got really good it still felt insecure about what it wanted to be, so it was hard to me to expect greatness from something that didn't know what it wanted to be so instead I just accepted it for what it was, if I allow myself one more reasonable theory, it's possible that the Dontnod team was a bit divisive about the style they chose which would help explain why there was that inconsistency of mocking hipsters why still trying to be hipster, I would also like to point out that episode 5 mentions pretentiousness a lot in the art gallery scene so that's probably why that is in my mind in regards to this game in particular.

 

[BloatedGuppy]

To the charge of "your choices don't matter"...same thing was leveled at TellTale's games, most notably with Walking Dead. They do matter. Your choices ARE THE GAME. That's you role-playing Max. That's you thinking through her decisions, and choosing how your interactions with people shake out. I'll never understand people who anticipate hundreds of outcomes as determined by wildly branching narratives. The game would be thirteen minutes long. I've yet to play a game with a multitude of outcomes where those outcomes weren't A) shallow, or entirely text based B) barely differentiated C) the game itself was greatly truncated/largely experimental. A game like Life is Strange, which was heavily scripted throughout, was always going to drive towards a very particular set of conclusions.

The thing is, that in case of TWD it didn't matter because even though your choices didn't matter in the end, the ending itself was satisfying. It was such a great conclusion that you knew was inevitable because the game was forcing that thought on you from the beginning of episode 5 basically, and yet it still made you cry like a little ***** because it was so well executed. In case of LiS, though, you feel like you were insulted by the fact that those choices didn't matter because there was no significant addressing to them throughout the entire thing. Not to mention the endings were completely anticlimactic, predictable, and generally unsatisfying (in a bad way; yes, and ending can be "unsatisfying" in a good way, look at Silent Hill 2, TWD, or Dark Souls for example) because no matter what you chose, you felt like you were getting a middle finger from the developers because of the sheer stupidity of every ending.

And as for the second part - Silent Hill games have done that "your choices affect the ending" thing for years and they did fine, so your argument is invalid.

One does not validate or invalidate arguments through the application of personal opinion. "Sure, you SAY the food at that restaurant is good, but I like the food at this other one better, so your argument is invalid".

I did not feel "insulted" by the resolution of LiS, nor did I feel the ending was thematically divorced from the game preceding it. Nor did I find the ending "anticlimactic". Predictable, perhaps, but predictable because it was the logical outcome. I wish a few more games had driven towards their logical, thematically appropriate outcomes (cough, Mass Effect 3, cough).

There IS a problematic/deeply flawed ending in LiS, but it's pretty evident you didn't choose it.

 

[happyninja42]

I didn't have much problem with the ending to be honest. I wasn't surprised by it at all, as it ended up being exactly what I thought it would be, with only a few genuine twists here and there.

I remember about a month ago, one of the creators at DONTNOD wrote a letter to the fans in the form of a game update through Steam, where he talked about episode 5, and time travel stories in general. He commented how time travel stories are notorious for falling apart in the conclusion due to all that paradox, plot hole, wibbly wobbly, timey wimey stuff. And he's right, I usually hate time travel stories because of these problems, and the only time travel stories I truly enjoy, and feel hold up solidly, are "closed loop" stories.

He hoped that episode 5 would hold together, and I think for the most part it did. It didn't have anywhere near the emotional impact that the end of episode 2 had for me, (holy shit that was intense), but it had some good moments I thought.

I honestly liked the end to the game, the final choice, though I haven't picked the Sacrifice Arcadia option yet so I can't comment there, I'll do that tonight after work. But I thought they handled it pretty well, as well as they could.

I disagree with the OP that none of our choices had any impact, as some of them did, but they were sort of snuck into the dialogue of certain scenes. Like choosing to euthanize Cripple Chloe, it did have consequences later, when you are trying to convince Chloe to not go to the party. It was like the choices with Kate on the roof. Depending on your choices, you either had an easier time talking her down, or a harder time. I'm still puzzled by the stuff with Alyssa though. I don't really see what the ramifications of helping/not helping her would be? Perhaps if you don't establish that trust with her regarding danger, she is too scared to walk across the board and thus is killed?

I also enjoyed the beginning where you have to play mind games with Jefferson to try and find a way out, though I agree with an above poster that the fight with David and Jefferson was a little tedious.

Anyway, I enjoyed the game, and I thought they did a decent job given the situation they created. Could they have done things better, sure. Did they do a good job with the naturally tricky issue of a time travel story? I think so. I'm still very glad I took a chance on the game, and still consider it one of the more enjoyable, and emotionally engaging games that I've played in a long time.

 

[Schadrach]

Maybe, there would be some episode 1 callback/plot thread that would let Max both stop the storm and save Chloe.

There was something she could do, but there's no guarantee as to how long it would have saved Chloe -- she could have interrupted the encounter personally. There's a reasonable chance if she did it at the right time than Nathan would have shot her instead. Given she had time to do so, she could have written down a crib notes version of the whole Jefferson thing.

Now, fate would probably conspire to kill off Chloe at the next earliest opportunity, but still.

I mean obviously, they wouldn't have Max develop time powers only to be instantly punished for using them in any way. That's just bad story telling.

That's basically the plot of The Butterfly Effect movies, movies which Life is Strange draws *ample* inspiration from. In both cases, the main character gets mysterious time travel powers (in the second movie using photos in pretty much the way Max does in LiS, in the first the protag keeps journals that serve the same purpose), and in the end realizes that all their tampering with time only causes misery and so prevents it from happening in the first place (in The Butterfly Effect 2 the protag ends up causing himself to die in a car accident before they got the time travel powers, in one ending filmed for The Butterfly Effect the protag uses a home movie of their birth to strangle themselves with their own umbilical cord, becoming the their mother's third stillborn child).

the ghost deer/spirit

It's another vision/her spirit animal. Specifically, there's a clear association between certain characters and certain animals -- Samuel is linked with squirrels, Chloe with the butterfly, Max with the doe. The blue butterfly first appears to herald Chloe being in danger (another lands on her coffin), her color scheme suggests the butterfly's colors. Max wears a doe on most of her clothing.

A better bit of imagery is Chloe's necklace. It's three bullets, she gets shot three times.

the fact that Max saw the storm before she saved Chloe.

A prophetic vision of a thing predated the action that ultimately determines if the thing occurs? I for one am not surprised.

That would be like saying you don't understand how the prophecy in Oedipus Rex could happen before the Laius gives Oedipus to Jocasta to kill him.

And he's right, I usually hate time travel stories because of these problems, and the only time travel stories I truly enjoy, and feel hold up solidly, are "closed loop" stories.

Ever heard of a movie called Triangle? You should watch it sometime. That's all I can say without spoiling things.

 

[BloatedGuppy]

There was something she could do, but there's no guarantee as to how long it would have saved Chloe -- she could have interrupted the encounter personally. There's a reasonable chance if she did it at the right time than Nathan would have shot her instead. Given she had time to do so, she could have written down a crib notes version of the whole Jefferson thing.

Now, fate would probably conspire to kill off Chloe at the next earliest opportunity, but still.

That was what froze me up at the final decision junction. Part of me was tempted to save Chloe anyway because that had been driving Max all along and had reached a point of obsession with her, but it seemed to me that "breaking the rules" once again to spare Chloe would just be prolonging the inevitable. Birds were dying. Whales were dying. Crazy weather was erupting. Reality seemed to be tearing itself apart, all on Max's inability to let Chloe's fate reach its natural conclusion. It felt like even if I *could* save Chloe, she'd just die again in another day or a week.

Made the alternate ending where the two of them drive off together seem rather grim. To say nothing of the rather startling body count that decision inflicted, and would likely continue to inflict.

 

[happyninja42]

Maybe, there would be some episode 1 callback/plot thread that would let Max both stop the storm and save Chloe.

There was something she could do, but there's no guarantee as to how long it would have saved Chloe -- she could have interrupted the encounter personally. There's a reasonable chance if she did it at the right time than Nathan would have shot her instead. Given she had time to do so, she could have written down a crib notes version of the whole Jefferson thing.

Now, fate would probably conspire to kill off Chloe at the next earliest opportunity, but still.

And that's the main problem with saving Chloe. Because the game takes heavily from stories like Final Destination in this regard, in that cheating Death/Fate/Destiny seriously fucks things up, and the Universe will do what it can to try and fix the glitch. So I don't see how, in a story that's designed around the idea of "Saving Chloe by fiddling with time is destroying time", that you could save her without it being pandering to the audience. I honestly am glad they went that route with it, even if it was very easy to see coming. I would've felt they took the easy way out to find some magical way to save everyone, where you didn't have to make a choice that had consequences. You can save Chloe, but at a cost, a very big cost. You can't have it all.

I mean obviously, they wouldn't have Max develop time powers only to be instantly punished for using them in any way. That's just bad story telling.

That's basically the plot of The Butterfly Effect movies, movies which Life is Strange draws *ample* inspiration from. In both cases, the main character gets mysterious time travel powers (in the second movie using photos in pretty much the way Max does in LiS, in the first the protag keeps journals that serve the same purpose), and in the end realizes that all their tampering with time only causes misery and so prevents it from happening in the first place (in The Butterfly Effect 2 the protag ends up causing himself to die in a car accident before they got the time travel powers, in one ending filmed for The Butterfly Effect the protag uses a home movie of their birth to strangle themselves with their own umbilical cord, becoming the their mother's third stillborn child).

Agreed, it's pretty much the crux of the story. It's a tragic tale of love and friendship. Not every story has a happy ending, or at least, not a happy ending where everyone involved gets a happy ending. The "happy" part of the ending is that the entire town gets to survive, and go on with their lives, without being violently destroyed in a storm. The needs of the many and all that.

the ghost deer/spirit

It's another vision/her spirit animal. Specifically, there's a clear association between certain characters and certain animals -- Samuel is linked with squirrels, Chloe with the butterfly, Max with the doe. The blue butterfly first appears to herald Chloe being in danger (another lands on her coffin), her color scheme suggests the butterfly's colors. Max wears a doe on most of her clothing.

A better bit of imagery is Chloe's necklace. It's three bullets, she gets shot three times.

Yeah, the bit with the deer I thought was pretty good, though I am left a little puzzled about it, as they never really explored the "what is the supernatural stuff" side of the story. They hint at it possibly being native american in origin, but then just leave it totally vague. Which honestly, I'm sort of ok with. Explaining it would probably end up like Medichlorians. A bullshit explanation that doesn't actually explain anything, and just makes everything seem stupid.

the fact that Max saw the storm before she saved Chloe.

A prophetic vision of a thing predated the action that ultimately determines if the thing occurs? I for one am not surprised.

That would be like saying you don't understand how the prophecy in Oedipus Rex could happen before the Laius gives Oedipus to Jocasta to kill him.

Or more likely that the game starts at the end of a previous week that Max tried to fix and failed, and thus she rewound to Monday and forgot everything. They explained pretty well that as the time paradoxes were getting worse, Max's ability to maintain grip on herself was getting harder. Also, the Max in the diner mentions how Max has been screwing things up a lot, implying she's been redoing that week over and over like Groundhog Day, shaving off alternate realities left and right, and leaving "death and destruction in her wake" as a result.

And he's right, I usually hate time travel stories because of these problems, and the only time travel stories I truly enjoy, and feel hold up solidly, are "closed loop" stories.

Ever heard of a movie called Triangle? You should watch it sometime. That's all I can say without spoiling things.

Nope, haven't seen it, but I'll try and remember to look it up.

capcha: call me maybe. This Action Will Have Consequences

 

[Schadrach]

And that's the main problem with saving Chloe. Because the game takes heavily from stories like Final Destination in this regard, in that cheating Death/Fate/Destiny seriously fucks things up, and the Universe will do what it can to try and fix the glitch. So I don't see how, in a story that's designed around the idea of "Saving Chloe by fiddling with time is destroying time", that you could save her without it being pandering to the audience. I honestly am glad they went that route with it, even if it was very easy to see coming. I would've felt they took the easy way out to find some magical way to save everyone, where you didn't have to make a choice that had consequences. You can save Chloe, but at a cost, a very big cost. You can't have it all.

I feel like if they *really* wanted a third ending where Chloe and the town both lived, they could have done one where Max didn't. Let's face it, Nathan (and eventually Jefferson) wasn't going to be busted unless he actually killed someone, and any reality in which both Max and Chloe survived that encounter was going to head towards the storm. The real question would be if fate would turn a blind eye to the "wrong" girl getting killed or just kill Chloe a few days later anyways (which would certainly drive home the whole "inevitability of fate" thing?

Yeah, the bit with the deer I thought was pretty good, though I am left a little puzzled about it, as they never really explored the "what is the supernatural stuff" side of the story. They hint at it possibly being native american in origin, but then just leave it totally vague. Which honestly, I'm sort of ok with. Explaining it would probably end up like Medichlorians. A bullshit explanation that doesn't actually explain anything, and just makes everything seem stupid.

I agree. There are times when explaining the magic destroys it. Like The Turk (a machine that played chess by having a guy hiding inside it making the actual moves).

Or more likely that the game starts at the end of a previous week that Max tried to fix and failed, and thus she rewound to Monday and forgot everything. They explained pretty well that as the time paradoxes were getting worse, Max's ability to maintain grip on herself was getting harder. Also, the Max in the diner mentions how Max has been screwing things up a lot, implying she's been redoing that week over and over like Groundhog Day, shaving off alternate realities left and right, and leaving "death and destruction in her wake" as a result.

That involves her getting a third variant of time travel that hadn't happened previously (one that notably doesn't jerk her back to the present afterward and makes her forget while none of the others did). Much like in the Butterfly Effect, after going back via photo and changing that incident she gets shunted to the present to continue from there. Along with a nosebleed from her brain restructuring itself to deal with all those new memories (another thing taken from the Butterfly Effect).

Also, Max doesn't need to Groundhog Day the whole week to have screwed up things a lot -- she'd gone back and rewritten chunks of the timeline enough to meet that criteria. I mean, Chloe dies what, 5 times in total (assuming we count the timeline where Chloe's dad lives) before the ending? Not to mention Frank and Pompidou dying and undying as appropriate. That's leaving out changes that don't kill anyone.

Nope, haven't seen it, but I'll try and remember to look it up.

Another one you might consider is HPMOR, an alternate universe Harry Potter fanfic created by an AI researcher (Elizier Yudkowsky) as a vehicle to discuss his views on rationality. It's...strange. Really strange. It also has a lot of time travel that happens, constrained by a 6 hour/day time limit and all time travel results in a single pass consistent timeline. He was inspired by the Prisoner of Azkaban using that model -- technically in PoA they don't go back and change the past, instead they were wrong about what originally happened in a way that makes them decide to go back and cause it to have happened in the first place.

If you want to dip a toe into Yudkowsky's stuff without having a 122 chapter monstrously verbose novel in front of you, he also wrote a short piece called Three Worlds Collide, but it's not about time travel at all -- it is about first contact.

 

[happyninja42]

snip

I feel like if they *really* wanted a third ending where Chloe and the town both lived, they could have done one where Max didn't. Let's face it, Nathan (and eventually Jefferson) wasn't going to be busted unless he actually killed someone, and any reality in which both Max and Chloe survived that encounter was going to head towards the storm. The real question would be if fate would turn a blind eye to the "wrong" girl getting killed or just kill Chloe a few days later anyways (which would certainly drive home the whole "inevitability of fate" thing?

True, I did foster the theory that you might get the choice to die in Chloe's place instead, closing the loop that way. But the more I played the game, the less I felt this would be an option. Though my one issue with this type of story (The Final Destination idea), is that it gives such a huge significance to each person in the grand scheme of things. I mean, LiS establishes one of two following situations:

1. All of the temporal stuff is due to Chloe not dying over and over.

2. It's a cumulative effect of Max changing tons of things. Saving Alyssa from her minor head bonkings, saving Kate from a fate she wouldn't have suffered anyway (which doesn't make sense in itself), etc etc.

IIRC, the Discworld Time Monks had a great relationship with time. That it mostly just keeps on rolling without much regard to the minor details like "Who dies when/how/where." The temporal momentum just doesn't really get derailed because of something so minor. But, hey, LiS isn't that kind of story, so it's ok, it just sort of rubs my brain wrong on a personal level. xD

snip

That involves her getting a third variant of time travel that hadn't happened previously (one that notably doesn't jerk her back to the present afterward and makes her forget while none of the others did). Much like in the Butterfly Effect, after going back via photo and changing that incident she gets shunted to the present to continue from there. Along with a nosebleed from her brain restructuring itself to deal with all those new memories (another thing taken from the Butterfly Effect).

Also, Max doesn't need to Groundhog Day the whole week to have screwed up things a lot -- she'd gone back and rewritten chunks of the timeline enough to meet that criteria. I mean, Chloe dies what, 5 times in total (assuming we count the timeline where Chloe's dad lives) before the ending? Not to mention Frank and Pompidou dying and undying as appropriate. That's leaving out changes that don't kill anyone.

I would agree if the final time jump she does, wasn't to the exact same spot as the beginning of the game. Also, she says flat out to Chloe at one point "You need to tell me this stuff when you see me again, because I won't remember it." Implying that her ability to maintain mental consistency was going out the window as things got worse. Which would make sense, considering the nightmare time fuckery she experienced after that. And it wouldn't really need a third power (though it's not like they didn't give her new powers every episode for a while), she had a selfie of the classroom moment. She could use that and go back. Or simply what happened in the game. She blacks out, wakes up in class again. There's a dozen ways this could play out, but I take the statement of the Other Max, to imply that this isn't the first time this situation has taken place. I could be wrong sure, they don't make it 100% clear, but it's what I think is going on. Either way, it doesn't make much difference one way or the other. Whether it was a prophetic vision, or simply a repeat of events that get repeated again later on, the end result is the same.

Nope, haven't seen it, but I'll try and remember to look it up.

Another one you might consider is HPMOR, an alternate universe Harry Potter fanfic created by an AI researcher (Elizier Yudkowsky) as a vehicle to discuss his views on rationality. It's...strange. Really strange. It also has a lot of time travel that happens, constrained by a 6 hour/day time limit and all time travel results in a single pass consistent timeline. He was inspired by the Prisoner of Azkaban using that model -- technically in PoA they don't go back and change the past, instead they were wrong about what originally happened in a way that makes them decide to go back and cause it to have happened in the first place.

If you want to dip a toe into Yudkowsky's stuff without having a 122 chapter monstrously verbose novel in front of you, he also wrote a short piece called Three Worlds Collide, but it's not about time travel at all -- it is about first contact.

Interesting. Yeah that is another example of the closed loop time travel stuff that I find the least frustrating. I forgot about the time turner from POA. Another favorite of mine is 12 Monkeys.

I think I might skip on the fan fiction though, not sure I would find it compelling enough to keep reading. I find I have little patience for written books these days, and mostly stick to audiobooks while I'm doing other tasks that require my physical attention.

 

[BloatedGuppy]

1. All of the temporal stuff is due to Chloe not dying over and over.

I feel like it HAS to be this. Not only does it cease happening after she dies, but there was a clear moment in episode 4 where she's shot in the head and the 2nd moon disappears from the sky.

Chloe being alive when she "shouldn't have been" is what was tearing reality. Made the "save Chloe" ending particularly confusing.

 

[happyninja42]

1. All of the temporal stuff is due to Chloe not dying over and over.

I feel like it HAS to be this. Not only does it cease happening after she dies, but there was a clear moment in episode 4 where she's shot in the head and the 2nd moon disappears from the sky.

Chloe being alive when she "shouldn't have been" is what was tearing reality. Made the "save Chloe" ending particularly confusing.

True, but then what's so special about her to cause this then? And why does the Universe keep trying to thwap Alyssa upside the head in a fairly minor/annoying way? If we only saw these repeat results happening to Chloe, I'd give it more weight, but Alyssa is a perfect example of their being a bigger plan that has to be adhered to. Like I said, this type of idea that "one person's fate could couch fuck the entire Universe to the point where an entire town has to be wiped from the earth, killing hundreds to balance out the scales is just sort of...egocentric I guess? Hubristic? I dunno. It just seems strange to me. I mean I get it thematically in the "One persons' love for a dear friend, and what they will do to save her" story, but structurally it just always makes something in the back of my head go "Bwuh?"

 

[BloatedGuppy]

True, but then what's so special about her to cause this then? And why does the Universe keep trying to thwap Alyssa upside the head in a fairly minor/annoying way? If we only saw these repeat results happening to Chloe, I'd give it more weight, but Alyssa is a perfect example of their being a bigger plan that has to be adhered to. Like I said, this type of idea that "one person's fate could couch fuck the entire Universe to the point where an entire town has to be wiped from the earth, killing hundreds to balance out the scales is just sort of...egocentric I guess? Hubristic? I dunno. It just seems strange to me. I mean I get it thematically in the "One persons' love for a dear friend, and what they will do to save her" story, but structurally it just always makes something in the back of my head go "Bwuh?"

Ultimately the reason is authorial fiat, but I guess if you really wanted to be provocative on this forum you could float out something like "constants and variables" and watch the pitchforks come out.

For whatever reason, Chloe's death seems to be something of a fixed event. Either because her continuing on alive had too much ripple effect, or because the varied things that Max fucks around with after she fails to die are irrelevant, it was Chloe being saved that set everything in motion (raising the criticism of "why give her time travel powers if she's not supposed to use them").

 

[Insane Guy of DOOM]

Speaking of Life is Strange borrowing from The Butterfly effect, I just realized, it borrows from something else, especially in how it ends, from another source.

Stephen King's novel 11/22/63.

It's a book about a man named Jake Epping who discovers a way to travel back in time to 1963 (well, a little earlier, he has to wait some) and resolves to use this power to stop the assassination of JFK. He soon finds that some force is trying to stop him, that no matter how hard he tries to stop the assassination or save other people, contrived coincidences keep getting them killed/hurt.

For example he tries to stop a friend of his from having his entire family murdered. First time he saves the family but the friend dies. Second time he saves all of them but the friend is left crippled due to an accident that only happened in the new timeline...

Finally, he manages to stop Lee Harvey Oswald and returns to the present only to find a massive environmental disaster is destroying everything. In this case, it's a massive earthquake which scientists say will eventually cause the entire planet to shatter. Then a mysterious man he kept noticing (kind of like Samuel) explains that he's a "guardian" whose job is watch over time. Trying to alter the past breaks reality, and by saving JFK and all the other changes he made, he caused the earthquake and the only way to stop it is to go back and prevent himself from ever going back in time.

To make matters worse, that means he'll have to sacrifice the love of his life, Sadie, a woman he met in 1963 because she originally was murdered but Jake changed history by intervening and scaring off her attacker.

There is a slightly happier ending though. After Jake stops himself from ever time traveling and lets the past go as it should, he looks up old newspapers to see about Sadie and learns she actually survived. He meets up with Sadie, now a very old woman, who seems to remember him vaguely...

 

[sXeth]

I mostly noticed that the ending seemed to force odd things not only that were against your choices (If you didn't have Max show any interest in Chloe, it still pushes forward with them being in love, the nightmare jealousy stuff, and kissing at the Arcadia Ending) and things that were just outright illogical (Warren is at Chloe's funeral with Max, but why are Kate and Victoria there?).

The stealth section was also functionally broken. If you get seen you could just tap rewind the light off of you and keep going, since Max stays in place while everything else rewinds. The dorm door "puzzle" just seemed like padding too.