u/NeoArkodd

Before you jump on me, I will clarify that I don't like the story of the new Doom games. Doom 2016 has a clishe and generic story with the biggest sin of having unskippable cutscenes. Doom Eternal has a confusing story and overcomplicated lore which retcons itself constantly. Doom the dark Ages has a boring and dull story with no life or energy in it. I love these games because of their gameplay, enemy designs, environmentsand and music but none of them have compelling characters, character arcs or well written narratives. Despite all these there is only one aspect which I want to defend about the story of these games and that's the new characterization of the Doomguy because many gamers interpret him as something entirely different.

I think most of the blame doesn't go to these gamers or meme makers themselves but to the creative head of these games, Hugo Martin. I think Martin did a good job with handling everything else but the story because it feels like he is just really out of touch when it comes to examining the reception of these games. The misinterpretation stems from the fact that the old dooms games weren't "Intellectual" as they didn't have a story or themes but the new doom games badly want to be have a Warhammer 40K like deep like and story but the gamers and fans just don't care about the story and lore and still treat them with anti-intellectual mindsets which is valid because they stories weren't deep or well written to begin with but this has caused the gamers to actively or ignorantly deny the way doomguy is portrayed.

Like doomguy isn't even a well written or deep character but he isn't a psychopath violent sigma male thirsty to kill either. I haven't read those "Flynn Tagart" books so I won't cover them but it's clear the new games portray him as a serious person who WANTS TO SAVE HUMAN LIVES. This version of doomguy doesn't enjoy or get a boner over killing demons as if he sees all of these as an entertaining hobby. No, he genuinely wants to eradicate demons so they wouldn't harm any more humns.

In the opening of 2016, Doomguy sees the corpse of an UAC worker in the elevator and smashes the screen of Samuel Hayden defending his actions regarding harvesting energy from hell. Many people interpreted this scene as a way of "Doomguy or the game not giving a shit about the story, Hell Yeah! ". They treat Doom 2016 as a "Satire or parody of modern story driven games". Ok if that was the case, then why the fuck does the game lock you into a room so Hayden can exposition dump you without giving you the option of skipping it, not just once but TWICE. Doom 2016 sets the whole sentinel lore and Doomslayer being a eons old god thing and takes all of these VERY SERIOUSLY. It's kinda baffling when people spare this game's story from criticism because they think it was "Self aware" because it wasn't. There is a literal lore entry explaining the science of a max health pick up, explaining it as "UAC scientists put argent energy into these capsules which desolve in the air and heals the subject" type of shir. Does this reads like a parody game to you? If your argument is the game wasn't as bullshit as the other two, that's valid but don't pretend like it had a remotely good story with it's clishe "Capitalism bad" message being the deepest thing it had going for. The devs didn't backtracked in Eternal, the success of Doom 2016 caused them to learn the wrong lessons and continue what they already had planned before hand which was expanding the lore. Doomguy in 2016 still takes everything seriously. Without listening to Hayden's exposition dump, he wouldn't know where to go or what to do. This applies to Eternal too.

In Doom Eternal‌, Doomguy doesn't land on Earth to stop the invasion all by himself. Yes, I guess he could but that would take a very long time so instead he goes for killing the priests in order to stop the invasion as fast as possible. His objective in not having fun by killing demons, it's saving as many human lives as possible. In the dlc, he fucking gives the satan god his body back so he can kill him NOT TO SHOW OFF but to break a bullshit seal so demons can't exist outside of hell. He literally took a gamble by bringing back devil so he can get the chance of ensuring the security of earth forever. In the dark ages, he broke his tech/magic or whatever control leash all because he heard screams of innocent people dying.

Gamers glaze him as this violent and selfish beast with no regard to human life. That whole "Doomguy can rip apart demons but only uses weapons as a challenge" is so bullshit. If this guy only cared about having fun, he wouldn't go to stupid quests and would just stay in hell. I will be honest, I don't like the stories of these games as I said but I like how doomguy is actually a heroic and serious person who takes the story seriously to save as many people as possible instead of being a antihero who doesn't give a shit and only wants to kill demons and just randomly saves the day all by chance. But I think I only like this because it clashes with people's nihilistic view of doomguy despite that he is still not a deep or interesting character and the story surrounding him is bad.

At the end, It all comes down to Hugo Martin's obsession with story and lore ruining the franchise in the long run. The stories are also bad so people ignore them and by doing so also misinterpret doomguy's true motivation. Hugo has said before how much he wants to make games like blockbusters or action movies but doesn't understand that the mediums are really different and those action movies need to have a good story to be good.

I like many people agree that the new doom games just need to ditch the story aspect entirely. I think doomguy shooting a death star laser on Mars or fighting demons in a medieval setting or lovecraft dimension is fun but we DON'T NEED A STORY for that. If the next game just puts doomguy in a prehistoric setting killing demon dinosaurs without any context, I wouldn't even care. We can have these crazy environments, demon designs and scenes of doomguy disobeying scientists or angels in order to save lives without the boring lore trying to justify them.

Edit: Also I ahted how TAG 2 made him a "Primordial" god like figure instead of a normal soldier who earned his super powers because aliens though he was worthy of it.

I also I don't like the rabbit thing. I think it's stupid and is just for cringe memes.

Let me start by saying media literacy shouldn't just be "I understood the subtext". It should also contain recognizing bad writing, tropes and bad creative decisions. It should be "I understood the subtext but the subtext is bullshit and poorly executed".

The worst take that I have heard from this fanbase is "Homelander was always a pathetic loser, he was never smart" in order to defend the bad writing of seasons 2 to 5 which is just baffling and factually WRONG!

Here's what Homelander did in season 1:

When Translucent was missing, he immediately locked in to find him, flying over the city to search for him. Modern HL would send Deep to do this job, if he even realized a member of the seven was missing at all.

After the flight 37 incident, he quickly shifted the narrative to put the blame on military. Modern HL would whine to Ashley to spin this shit because she is the spin doctor and he can't do that himself for some reason.

He heard that politician blackmailing Madeline in episode 1 and immediately took initiative to protect the company secret. Modern HL would just stare intensely and do nothing probably.

After Mesmer snitched on the boys, he immediately searched them up and figured out their entire operations through the season. Trump lander would make Sage do that and receive a report from her because he himself can't do that anymore.

He realized the inconsistencies between the stories of Madeline and Vougleboum, figured out something was off and punished them both for lying to him about Ryan. Trump lander would just ...... eh ....... do nothing I guess. He wouldn't even listen to the stories properly I suppose.

And the BIGGEST OF IT ALL. Even before the season began, he orchestrated the entire supe terrorist thing. He secretly gave V vials to A-train to give them to terrorists so the supes can have an excuse to get into military to protect US from the danger he himself created and it worked perfectly and the supes got the military contracts Brilliant! Hell, his decision kickstarted the entire series as A-train hit Robin when he was spreading those vials. Remember that stupid scene from the end of season 4 when Sage suddenly shows up and says "All according to the plan" ? Homelander pulled that way before and in a well written and effective way. He didn't need Sage, he himself was smart and cunning.

Then season 2 came out and it flanderized the hell out of him. From the very first scene of the season 2, he starts drinking milk like a baby and throws a tantrum to Ashely over a blind guy. Season 1 HL wouldn't dismiss Blindspot for being blind when he knows he is still capable of killing targets effectively but we can't show that HL is SMART, we have to show how egotistically stupid he is because ERIC KRIPPLE is a hack fraud!

And remember that supe terrorist plan that worked very well in season 1? It was actually a BAD plan this whole time and Homie was stupid for doing that, you see? Suddenly Stan Edgar comes and tells him how stupid he is for doing something that benefited the company at the end. Literally in the very next episode, the image of the Vought is saved because they killed a supe terrorist and Stan and Stormfront take credit for it but IT WAS HOMIE'S PLAN. You can't scold him for that plan and then benefit from the very same plan. Stan didn't even acknowledged this nor did he thanked Homelander at all.

We also got that "Homelander doesn't understand how social media manipulation works" plotline so Stormfront can come and teach him how "memes" work! FUCKING KILL ME PLEASE.

I don't even want to talk about the whole "He will snap" BS since all that build up led to nothing so we all can universally agree it was a bad creative decision in hindsight. Instead of making him crazier, we could have had Season 1 Homelander for 5 seasons. Just imagine if that actually happened. The boys could have been the next breaking bad but Eric Creep key doesn't want to make a good show, you see!

And stop fucking bringing up that "He was beefing a baby in season 1" defense. That was like two or three scenes at max. He was just annoyed of that baby, he wasn't "beefing" with him. He didn't even kill the baby after killing Madeline because he wasn't insecure about it. Modern HL would just cry in front of Stillwell and shout "You love baby more than me" like a toddler. Season 1 HL knew to keep his emotions in check.

In conclusion, Homelander from season 1 and Homie from season 2 to 5 are completely different characters. If yoh genuinely can't tell the difference between the two and how they flanderized him then I don't know what to say anymore.

Firstly, I have to inform you that I haven't played a single game made by Hideo Kojima so I have no opinions on them. But given the influence and cultural impact that his games have, he probably deserves to have his reputation as the "goat" in the gaming industry.

But I watch movies and I confidently can say that he doesn't deserve the title of the "goat" when it comes to movie reviews.

If you don't know when Kojima likes a movie, he writes a long paragraph about it in his tweets but if doesn't like it, he just says "I watched The Marvels" for example. So in the eyes of the fandoms, a movie getting an "I watched ...." review is worse than a 3 page essay picking it apart.

Since Kojima wrote a paragraph for the new Supergirl too, comparing it to "The good the bad and the ugly", now people feel validated that "The goat has spoken, all other opinions are invalid" as the movie's reception isn't still terrible and it hasn't bombed in the box office.

All of these attention directed toward a guy who wrote paragraphs about CW Flash, The Last Jedi and Argyle too. He is the quintessential "MUH THEMES" guy. He will say something positive about any piece of garbage that has a half baked thematic message, no matter how awful the script or actual quality of the show or movie may be. His opinions are worthless, soft and vibe based.

I ask this to people who can't form their opinions or want to feel validated, Is this really your goat?

I like Deltarune. I liked chpater 1. I really liked chapters 2, 3 and 4 and I think Chapter 5 was underwhelming but still not bad. I thought the music and narrative were weak but the gameplay, bosses and visuals were great which is the general consensus shared by the fans so far.

But the new chapter being subpar kinda brought both extreme reactions into my attention. With some people criticizing it. Some people defending it and some people criticizing the ones who are defending it as Deltarune fans can't take criticism.

As chapters have went along, a mostly silent minority did form seeing the youtuber Fennekinfox as their voice. Someone who finally dared to criticize Toby Fox only to be shut down by deltarune fans. I will not lie. I never liked this guy and couldn't even watch his new video because of how smug and elitist he sounded but unlike previous videos, this time the comments all agreed with him. Even going as far as saying stuff "Chapter 1 was the only good one" and "Chapters 3 and 4 had bad music". Chapter 5 being mid finally made Fennekinfox look like a sage or seer in the eyes of these people. "He had warned us and we just didn't listen" type moment. So the hate train as small as it is, has finally began and is yet to grow.

I wouldn't care about these that much but something one comment said got stuck in my mind. "When Chapter 7 turns out to be bad, all fans will come back and admit they were wrong". Like sure, Chapter 7 is years away but that's not impossible to happen. Maybe the ending will be bad and maybe it will make us realize Deltarune was never good.

I know you will say "You are overreacting to a contrarian opinion by a minority" but the same had happened with many franchises. When some fans criticized GoT after season 4 they were also dismissed. Some people said The Boys fell off after season 1 and guess what in retrospect those people were all right. Remember how defensive Chainsaw man fans were to any criticism of Part 2?

Toby Fox is a creator who doesn't seem to care about criticism. Combined with a fanbase that is so defensive and a minority of people who are pointing out the cracks but no one is listening to them. I think all of these are red flags and signs of the inevitable fall of Deltarune as much as I hate to admit it. Just like those mentioned franchies fans will defend the game until it becomes indefensible but at that point, it will be too late.

If Chapter 6 turns out to be subpar too then no miracle can save Chapter 7 which is a shame because most media that I follow always and ALWAYS turn bad with awful endings. Deltarune was one of the few which hadn't let me down yet but I am scared that it will eventually. Nearly 10 years of investment and a story nearly 20 years in the making all would go to waste.

We can dismiss those vocal minority of haters but history shows that those type of people eventually get proven to be right.

Before i start, i need to adress that NO, i don't mean or share the general opinion of "It was a good season but the finale ruined it". I want to argue that the entirety of the season was bad actually. Here we go:

This season forgot what was the premise of the show

Remember how the first season was about a group of powerless humans having to find creative ways to kill super humans? Well Eric Creep Key certainly doesn't. Even season 2 pretended to have high stakes sometimes with the boys having to hide from the supes (The plot armor in season 2 was still BS but that's another rant).

Season 3 literally starts with the boys casually interacting with Homelander and nothing happening. Yeah HL can't kill them because of that stupid flight 37 blackmail but that's my point. They introduced something that nullified the entire stakes of the show since Homelander isn't a threat or scary anymore.

The worst part is that they randomly introduce V24 or temp V too which demolishes any remaining stakes whatsoever. How the hell are Butcher and Hughie with temp V strong enough to throw hands with Homelander? If temp V makes a twink like Hughie powerful enough to push Homie aside, then why didn't just Butcher gave it to CIA appointed agents to create a group powerful enough to hold down and kill Homelander? From what i counted Butcher and Hughie each used temp V around 6 and 4 times respectively. So they could have kept that and create 8 supes which would be enough to deal with Homelander and since everyone would take V24 once, the danger of cancer wouldn't be an issue.

Regardless the fact that the show started with characters having to act smart but gave them power to punch their way out of situations with no brains, is baffling. That entire Herogasm fight is just hype and aura which the fans fell for. A show making fun of superhero media shouldn't have a marvel like fist fight which wasn't even choreographered well either. Homelander could have grabbed Soldier boy or anyone else, flown up in the air and left him to fall to death but of course that require CGI and budget. Dear Eric Kripple, if you want to have a superhero fight scene and don't have the budget, why did you even make a superhero show? Go direct a movie with a big studio, you hack!

Season 3 sets up season 4 and 5 (Derogatory)

All the unnecessary filler material of seasons 4 and 5 are present here too. It's funny how some fans call this season "PEAK" when it wasted a noticeable amount of screen time to MM fighting with a smoke alarm and talking in an empty room, frenchie and Kimiko talking in an empty room, Starlight and Hughie talking in ...guess what ....EMPTY ROOMS.

MM already had a tragic backstory with his father dying so this whole "Soldier boy killed my family" plotline feels unnecessary. Kimiko and Frenchie literally go through the same arc every season so this the third time it gets repeated, wow so original! And who can forget Starlight being a hypocrite and scolding Hughie getting superpowers. Honestly ever since Hughie and Starlight got together, their relationship hadn't add anything good to the story so maybe them breaking up permanently would be a better storyline.

It's also funny how people say Herogasm was the best episode when that fight scene was only 5 minutes and only towards the end of the episode. The rest of the episode is filled with guess what .... the mentioned fabulous five characters TALKING TO EACH OTHER IN EMPTY ROOMS. You could erase these plotlines and nothing of value would be lost. I don't even need to talk about the excessive gore and dick jokes that had plagued the show since season 2.

The season finale is actually consistent because the entire season was building towards it (Derogatory)

After witnessing season 5 and surviving through rewatching season 3, something horrifying suddenly clicked for me and it's the fact that the supposedly "rug pull" ending of season 3 didn't actually came out of nowhere.

Ok Here me out. The season is about the boys finding a weapon to kill Homelander which is the logical thing to do but the story even from the very beginning scolds Butcher for trying to do this. In episode 3 Mallory says that Butcher only wants to kill Homie for himself and he is as bad as his father then Butcher blames Ryan for Becca's death so Ryan runs away crying with SAD MUSIC. Also remember that this single season is the entire reason why that little shit took Homie's side in the finale all because Butcher was mean to him. In episode 4, MM calls out Butcher for being an asshole and at the end we see Hughie being satisfied by his supe powers while Kimiko is bleeding while OMINOUS MUSIC is playing in the background. Ep5 also ends with the same OMINOUS MUSIC when the boys team up with Soldier boy, the same goes for the end of Ep6.

It's funny how despite being not subtle, most of us didn't see the signs of an abysmal finale. Like the rest of the boys eventually changed their minds from going with this plan before hand either because they hated Butcher and Soldier boy or because SB's explosions are collateral damage and isn't worth killing Homelander despite him being a bigger threat (Kinda funny how season 5 discredited both sides of the argument at the same time) so the entire season NEVER EVER intended to have HL get killed or have any change in the status quo in the long run. People like to say "They wrote themselves into a corner" or "Amazon didn't want them to end the show" but i genuinely think Eric Crypt Key started writing the season with that finale in mind because he is just that kind of a hack. Even in season 5, the show was afraid to do anything interesting to the status quo because Kripple himself is a establishment liberal and thinks "Homelander was a bad apple, the system isn't the problem".

Now you might ask "What was the point of the season then?" Well you see the moral message of the season was about "Moral dilemma of using V24" and "Toxic masculinity being bad" so yes, the same way Kripple sacrificed the writing of the entire show for his "Trump bad" message, he did the same thing for the writing of season 3 too so he can plaster a fucking kids cartoon message on top of an adult streaming show. Bravo Creep Key.

Some people even the ones who dislike TLJ seem to think that what Luke did at the end is the "most jedi thing ever" and he died ceremoniously while it couldn't be further from the truth.

Firstly, Luke didn't accomplish anything meaningful. Yes he distracted the Crylo Ren and the Turd order so the "not rebellion" can escape but in the grand scheme of things, that was neither memorable nor impactful. Wouldn't it be more epic, if Luke actually was there and actually helped the resistance by destroying AT-M6 walkers? How can Luke's death be impactful when he didn't achieve anything? This brings me into my next point:

"The most Jedi thing ever" is total BS. People for some reason took that quote from Yoda in ESB too literally. He meant that Jedi should fight for peace, not that they never fight or resolve conflicts without violence because that mindset contradicts the entire prequel era. Oh Jedi shouldn't have fought the separatists, they should have just protected what they love..... wow. What a great strategy! This defense from TLJ defenders is beyond stupid because it's like they forgot the franchise is called Star "WARS".

And lastly, his death itself wasn't ceremonious at all, the director Rian Johnson just gaslighted you. Luke literally died because he overdosed from using too much force. That must be the most pathetic way to go in star wars history. Yes his final moment is sitting on a rock, looking at twin suns while John Williams is setting the orchestra on fire but that's it. A ceremonious death is not what the writer or director dictates on audience, it's what the audience themselves should naturally feel. The great cinematography and music tries to trick you into thinking the scene is epic but it doesn't change the fact that Luke died for nothing and died in a pathetic way so at the end you don't feel satisfied or sad, you just feel empty and betrayed.