the-pi-guy said:
Becasue of Angrboda, Atreus was able to seal Odin away, and was able to stop Garm. That is a good point. Angrboda was not absolutely useless. I guess my problem lies more with how she is incorporated into the story with the Jotunheim-section being that long. But hey, more directly to your point: They could have stopped Garm differently I am sure. But it is important that they stopped him this way because of the escape route from Asgard that would not have been there otherwise (Fenrir). So - yes to that. But as you read, I have severe problems in why they would need an escape from Asgard in the first place, since Ragnarök was so unnecessary. Odin: No. Atreus was able to seal away Fenrir at the start of the game. I am not buying that Angrboda was necessary for Atreus to do the same with Odin. Also - feels insignificant that Atreus had to seal him away given the fact that Sindri kills him 2 seconds later anyways. Feels more like character protection for Atreus - he is too noble to kill even somebody as deserving as Odin.
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. That is true, yes. I think I mischaracterized the situation. Finding Tyr was important for Atreus. He is obsessed with the future, as is Odin. They make for a good storytelling pair - how one can let go and the other is unable to. But it is a different story with Kratos. Kratos does not want Ragnarök. He wants peace. And since we know that prophecy is whatever, eh could have had it. Choosing to find Tyr and antagonising Asgard was the first step away from that possibilty. And it should not have been a difficult choice: Do you want your kid (relatively) safe and angry at you, or in grave danger if not dead? Kratos is the one calling the shots. And he absolutely should have decided not to search for Tyr and keep peace with Asgard. Atreus could have still searched without Kratos knowledge like before. And that might have been what should have happened in the story. But that is just half my complaint - they could have made that war god prison break a tad more exciting.
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. I feel that, yes. We had to help because Odin stole the moon and without it, they cannot chase (and I guess this is just what they do). But why is it that Odin knows about the moon thing being the next corner stone on the way to Ragnarök and he still steals it? Is it not a way better prevention tactic if he does not steal it? And yeah, I know that the Einherjar in Vanaheim and other areas are servants of Odin. But why even have them there? And there presence is not very strongly felt until Odin steals the moon anyways. So what was the conflict between Vanaheim and Asgard about beforehand? Perhaps there is no need for the player to know that. But looking back I ask myself what I actually did there and it feels like a disjointed mess of a nothing burger. Perhaps I am too critial. And I actually know that the first visit was to help Freya and the second to help the kidnapped Freyr and the celestial wolves. It is just the bigger conflict that I don't get.
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." That is a misunderstanding. I am not saying that what I got from the game is that prophecy is inevitable. I am saying that if it is not inevitable, there sure are a lot of prophecies that came exactly true. Not a single sole in the (surely long) history of giant prophecy started to make different choices and became a better or worse person? If so Angrboda would have known since she is the one entrusted with the giants legacy. She strongly beliefs prophecy to be inevitable. The norns knew better of course but their explenation is weak as paper. Choose something different and something different happens. And you are going to be the first in the records of history to do so. Alright. Sure. I agree by the way with what you said here. 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. Yeah, I more often than not hate when something is overexplained in a story.
"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. Agreed. He sure was more than just comic relief. Especially in Ragnarök he was more important. And seeing Sindri so broken was really well done. Felt more about him aswell. With Sindri it is just: I can't see him blaming Atreus so hard. Odin tricked everybody, including Sindri. And Sindri helped Atreus find Tyr, even before the game started. This was all on his own. Nobody forced him to. But I guess it is still realistic to a degree: after such a loss it is easier to blame somebody than to work through the reality of things.
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. 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. That is a very fair point to make. I played way slower than beating the game in 18h like in the video. But just length is perhaps besids the point. It is also about how you use your length. ... ... Playing slow is on me. But there were no stand out action moments in all that drab uneventful lameness anyways. This is a bit hyperbolic. But it felt boring. The spear thing too. Breaking out Tyr should have been and easily could have been an event. It was a layup they missed. That is my feeling about this game in a nutshell.
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. Interesting take. Definitely subjectiv. I thought if Kratos would not agree, him and Asgard would be on super bad terms. Now you might be right with your take of the conversation, since later in the game Tyr/Odin says that even though there was no deal, Odin still honored it. Perhaps it was a passive agreement. But how can Kratos or Mimir or Loki (who is famous for his eloquency) be so bad at communication. Could not one of them have said that they want peace and will not search for Tyr even though they will not have a formal agreement? (Loki not, since he wanted to find Tyr, but for Kratos and Mimir - I don't get it.) |
Thank your for your response!
