Google AI says that the games are a result of an unreliable narrator. I disagree
Hey there, so I came across a old gamefaqs thread where someone was basically claiming that VC is Gallian propaganda against Imperials and that everything. So I googled Valkyria Chronicles and unreliable narrator and got this AI summary.
It did link to a thread on here where someone asks if "On the Gallian Front" was reliable or not, to which primarily one person responded and debated the TC who was saying it was unreliable. So I looked into all the interviews of the games I could find. Both from websites and the interviews in the artbooks.
So I strongly disagree with the theory that everything we see in the games are a result of an unreliable narrator.
First, the games continually show antagonistic POV's, something that could not be explained by Ellet's reporting, the records of VC3 or Claudes Journal in VC4. This is the most damning proof against this theory. There is no explanation that could explain away the enemy POV across each game. In fact, in the instance of VC4, Belgar mentions that Clementia has been missing for some time, which is later explained by VC 2. Further evidence that the games are all canonical and interconnected.
Also, there are many instances in VC 1 and 4 where Ellett/Claude arent around for events of their squad mates. For example, many Squad stories in 4 show events and interactions that Claude would have no idea about. And therefore, not in his diary. Same with VC 1, Ellett may be a daring reporter who isnt afraid of the front lines, but she isnt in majority of scenes.
Second, the artbook "Valkyria Chronicles Design Archive" displays and shows all of the main story and dlc stories, and at no point does it indicate that it is false or part of some narrative spun by Ellett or her biases. Including again, enemy POVs.
Third, the developer interviews have no instances or allusions that the story is a unrealiable narrative. The developers always talk as if the story we see in the games is what happens. In fact, in a interview for VC4, the developers talk how they didnt want to include multiple choice endings because they didnt wants fans to argue what is canonical/true or not.
"RPG Site: In Valkyria Chronicles 3, you could develop two different relationships depending on if you chose Riela or Imca, so it developed two different stories leading to two different endings. Does something like that exist in Valkyria Chronicles 4?
Kei Mikami: With VC4, there’s only one main relationship because we felt that having two separate stories would divide fans into debating which one is the true route or story. We wanted to avoid that kind of debate this time around with having one clear story."
Why would they say this if the game wasnt the "true" route/story?
Finally, many games have narrations, including JRPGs. Fire Emblem Three Houses for example has narrations among tapestries illustrating the endings. No one in the FE fandom(to my knowledge) would argue that therefore the game is a biased work from the narrators POV. Point is, the games use Elletts book/Claudes Diary/records for the narration, not for the actual scenes we see in the game.
Someone may say "but the menus in VC1/4 are their respective books", to which I would respond, yes, its a UI, and one that contains countless photos that were never taken, such as during top secret enemy POVs. Somehow I doubt Ellett would be invited to Imperial high commands meetings with his generals.
In summary, all the cutscenes and story we see in-game occurs and happens as we see it. Google AI is incorrect here, and it makes a lot of assumptions.
Anyways, I figured id share all of this.
Thank you for reading!