By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
JuliusHackebeil said:

But that is far from my only criticism: the story felt meandering and for a long time without any stakes. For example, when I was in Jotunheim with Atreus and Angreboda (or whatever her name is) I thought: yeah, that is cool and very pretty, but what am I actually doing here? What is the purpose of all that? Snake origin - it bought them nothing: Thor still attacked Kratos before he could accomplish anything with Odin. Angreboda introduction - yes, but what was the purpose of her whole character? What did she really do? She helped a bit in the final fight but I cannot shake the feeling it would have been the same without her. Setting up the sequel - there we go - that is all this insanely drawn out feeding animals Jotunheim scene did.

Becasue of Angrboda, Atreus was able to seal Odin away, and was able to stop Garm.

JuliusHackebeil said:

There are a lot of examples where the story felt meandering and the whole quest pointless: why would Kratos and Atreus chose to find Tyr? Because Odin said they should not? That is what they say in the game but it is definitely not a good reason. At the time they thought Ragnarök meant the end of much more than just Asgard. So not finding Tyr could have been a good start to not having Ragnarök (since Tyr is the one who leads the army according to prohecy). But let's pretend finding Tyr was important. There was no urgency to it. Everything felt boring in these Svartalfheim mines. Mimir and Kratos both suggested more than one time during the quest to just give up on it. That was the energy in the room: I don't want to be here. How can the developers expect high engagement from me, if there is no urgency and the main character just wants to go home?

Atreus was trying to find Tyr before Odin said they shouldn't bother. Atreus felt that Tyr was important to figuring out his own future.

JuliusHackebeil said:

Another example: the second time you visit Vanaheim, it is to.. to... ... to do what exactely? Help Frayer fight to good fight? We need to get to her and save her brother. But how did he get injured? We did not see. What are they fighting for? Vanaheim (FOR VANAHEIM!!!)? What does that even mean? What would Odin do there if he had free reign? Did they get ambushed and kidnapped? Perhaps they said but I cannot remember and that is in itself a problem. It was a conflict I don't get. This is also true in a bigger way but more on that later.

This was the part of the story that I felt like I got lost in. Not for the reasons that you were mentioning though. I was fine before that point and afterwards. Where I got lost was in the middle. I wasn't sure what the point of interacting with the wolves was. We were supposed to save Freyr and Freya and then in the middle we're helping the wolves for some reason.

Hildsvini said Freyr and Freya got ambushed and kidnapped. He also does say to help the celestial wolves, but I guess I forgot that bit. 

The Einherjar in Vanaheim and other areas are servants of Odin.

JuliusHackebeil said:

Another example of the main quest feeling pointless and the story meandering: prophecy is inevitable. That is the logic the game mostly operates on. And then in the end everyting is different than was foretoled. So the whole thing about the norns was for nothing too. Think about that for a second. Apart from the start the whole reason to be in Midgard was for the norns. But what they foretold was not what happend. What the giants foretold was also not what happend. So why spend 3 to 4 hours of the game to be in Midgard and another 2 in Jotunheim if the games conclusion is: no, actually nevermind, we write our own destiny? We don't know why, or we don't care to explain, but just know that everything ist fine. What? You are making a game much about prophecy and destiny. And all the giant and norn prophecys are always correct. But suddenly they are not and you don't explain why?

I don't agree with this at all. 

Mimir says that prophecy is slippery. The main people that are chasing after prophecy at the very start of the game are Odin and Atreus. Odin because he's scared of what will happen. And Atreus because I think he wants answers about his future. 

Through most of the game, they're trying to beat prophecy. And the Norns imply prophecy is inevitable because people act predictably. 

I would strongly say the point of the story isn't that prophecy is inevitable. But I could say that it's that it's inevitable if you don't grow and be better. That's been a pretty consistent moral throughout 2018 and Ragnarok. "Don't be sorry, be better."

I will agree here though that the game is not very clear about what changed. 

But we do see people make different choices towards the end of the game. Kratos says before the fight that he has been slipping back into his old ways. We see Atreus decide to cross Odin at the end and destroy the mask, despite the fact that his curiosity throughout the whole story was the thing that started a lot of this. We also see Angrboda decide to get more involved after giving up, because she thought she wasn't important. 

Which one of these things made the difference? The game doesn't say. 

On a side note, I find it kind of fascinating that a lot of times having unanswered questions bothers people, and yet other times being able to speculate about what the answer is, a lot of people view as the mark of good writing. From Software's games get so much praise for their lore, particularly that there's this mix of a lot of it, and yet there's so many things that it doesn't spell out. 

JuliusHackebeil said:

Something different: why in the world would you try to craft a cool action sequence with Kratos carrying Freyr on his back when the dialogue makes it laughable/ridiculous? It could have been epic but felt funny at best due to Freyrs comments: "Whoa, dude, maaan, I think imma hurl." (-paraphrase) There was actually no single action scene in the whole game I felt super engaged with. I did not care for Freyr whom we just met. While fighting a giant was cool, I did not care for Angreboda either and the fight itself was not that great anyways. Trying to capture/kill Garm comes close to greatness action-wise (from a storytelling perspective it felt like another sidequest). But nothing comes even close to the 2018 sequence of events with the fight at the top of the mountain, Atreus shooting Kratos and being kidnapped by Baldur, Kratos not skipping a beat and jumping down that mountian, the fight on the dragon, Kratos falling, rushing inside the temple, going to Helheim, fighting Baldur some more and finaly getting Atreus back before crashing into some tower. That was the bomb! The Thor fight in the beginning had different locations, yes. But everything was foggy and I did not really get a sence of place. Could have just been in Kratos' backyard for the same effect. Even when Ragnarök happens it felt underwhelming from an action stantpoint. Jörmongandur is only in the distance fighting Thor - we don't even really get to see that. Fenrir is next to unnecessary as is Angreboda. You cannot see much. Again, everything is very foggy. The only somewhat good action the Asgard attack had, was the Thor fight and the Odin fight. And they happend almost entirely in game. Can you remember in 2018 when Kratos killed that dragon in the mountain? Nothing that cool/actiony ever happend in the entirety of Ragnarök.

This is definitely something that was done better in 2018, definitely agree here.  

JuliusHackebeil said:

So Brok is dead and they made a huge deal out of it. Only problem is: I felt nothing. He was the comic relief. And his drawn out nonsensical spear sidequest felt like giving him screen time so that his death feels sadder. It is what shit tv shows do when they want to kill off a character: give them an episode focused on them beforehand. Now perhaps others felt more about this comic relief side character biting the dust, and I liked Brok fine, but to make that the end of the game? His funeral and than the credits? Nothing with a Kratos and Atreus focus perhaps? How? Why?

"Comic relief" doesn't feel like the right descriptor. But on the whole I also didn't feel that sad about Brok.

I felt more sad about Sindri's response. 

JuliusHackebeil said:

As already said, so much of the games story felt meandering and pointless to me. Weirdly the ending felt rushed. Suddenly things kick into high gear and than it is over. Surtr was such a small quest but felt super, mega significant. On the other hand making the spear felt like it took forever. (But I did not buy into the idea that Kratos needed the spear to kill Heimdall in the first place. And what is even that: He perceives Heimdall as such a big threat that he is ready to kill him, but not to face him immediately. He goes on what feels like a sidequest even though his son could at any moment be murdered by Heimdall. Does not feel like the Kratos that jumped from a mountaintop to get faster to his son.) How is this a narritive choice: making yet another weapon for "the god killer" should take many fights and locations and story sequences and introduce new characters like the lady in the water and concepts like this form and nature thing, even though all the while his son, the only thing said "god killer" really cares about, is in mortal danger. Let's have finding Tyr be many hours long - and let's have everybody except Atreus don't want to be there. But, BUT: Let's have finding Surtr, convincing him to join their cause, and Surtr becoming (-title of the game incoming) Ragnarök, let's have that be just 2 fights and not even half a page of text for the guy. How is that a narrative choice. We spend more time in Muspelheim searching for some wooden mask piece (that did not amount to anything at all) than doing what the game says in the title it is about.

A lot of this is going to depend on how long you are taking to beat the challenges.

This person took about an hour and a half to find Tyr. And about 45 minutes for the whole Brok adventure to get the spear. 
So they very much had the opposite experience you did. 

But I can agree that it felt more like a gameplay driven storyline. It probably wasn't necessary for the story, but it felt a little bit more like an excuse to get a new weapon. 

JuliusHackebeil said:

To finish up: I don't get why Kratos said "no" to Odins offer for peace. Odin was a piece of shit. But he did not beheave terribly wrong in trying to prevent Ragnarök. Odin came to Kratos and wanted nothing but peace. Perhaps this was a lie but that was never shown. All we have is Kratos saying "no" to living in peace with his son. That is the inciting incident of the whole story. Kratos could have had no retribution come his way because of Magni, Modi and Baldur. And be on good terms with Asgard. And he said no, actually I don't want peace. Why? That is all he wants for the rest of the game.

To be honest, at the start of the game, I got the impression that Kratos didn't even think that it was necessary to agree with Odin. I think when that happened, he was just outright planning not to get involved in anyway. He wanted a passive agreement with Odin, instead of an active agreement. 

Mimir made it clear not to make any kind of agreement with Odin. And a lot of the sidequests show why.