Spoilers!! about ending

[Arthurization]

so, true demon is somewhat existed in 1970s with little kid? I know andrew and crews are imaginations but one demon is truly existed in 1970??

[Azukaos]

Автор сообщения: Blank

Автор сообщения: Morten

If that's what you think, you didn't understand Little Hope at all...

Nah I got the message, I just don't think that's why any of us play these type of games. Not to speak for everyone, but a large part of the joy comes from keeping your characters alive, and that feels utterly useless here when they're not even real. They did the same exact plot twist as the first one except instead of an outside source (the chemical) it was inside (his mental state from losing his family.)

I didn't play to man of medan, i wasn't sure to buy Little hope either, so for the "same plot twist" i couldn't really know something about it.

But beside the fact the "ending" could relatively be guessed before reaching the end because of the clues and hint you could find through the game, i was caring for them, whatever if they where already dead like daniel was hinting after the bus crash or they could be a real reincarnation of their past self locked in a loop by dying each time the same ways, i was still caring for them and was hoping they could reach the end alive (i wasn't in a big hope they could do tho) and they all managed to get through the night.

The "bad" part about it for me was the fact that after giving advice to abraham about the priest being the bad guy and saving mary from their fate, they all just "feel" it was over, not only for andrew/anthony and Tanya, but all of them.

Like something made them all "know" at the same time it was over, no more monster and no more chance death, that's was it.

That part feel a bit incomplete ? because of the sudden return to the reality for Andrew/anthony, even if this was only a story in his head it feels like there was supposed to be something more about them but wasn't, like something as simple as their souls passing to the other side or some kind of interpretation like that.

None of them where useless in the main part of the game, since even anthony could have died without them (like with the gun who was thrown by "angela"), but reaching the end even the good one, they all lost their meaning like "who cares about them, they where all fake anyways, there was no demons after all" and for me that doesn't make sense.

[Celine Dijon]

Автор сообщения: Solidus's Revenge

Автор сообщения: Blank

Obviously they're not real, Captain Obvious. But they're not even real in the universe of the game. It makes them feel entirely useless. Like I said all they did was recycle the story from the first one with some alterations.

Lazy plots twists are just lame. But you can think what you want, that's fine.

EDIT: Overall it was still a good story, the plot twist just felt cheap, and I saw it coming just as I did the last one so at the very least I wasn't that disappointed when the "big reveal" happened. I literally cannot get over how much it cheapened the overall experience when it was the big meme twist of "they were in his head all along." I thought we had left that trend in the last decade.

You are the one that decides whether or not you are invested in the characters/plot. If you don't like it, that's fine. I'm not saying you should. I just disagreed with your conclusion that since they are not "real" people, they don't matter or are "useless".

Right, and for me (and if you look at the negative reviews, I'm far from the only one who felt this way.) it makes the characters feel utterly useless. For other games, that's fine, but in a game where the literal goal is to keep everyone alive, it feels pointless when those characters are literally only in the head of another. There is no sense of accomplishment or sadness when they live/die because they DO NOT EXIST. Finding out that losing Taylor/Daniel meant nothing because they were never real... as I said the overall experience was made VERY cheap. But we both have our opinions and that's cool

EDIT: And trust me, I get the deeper meaning of the overall story, I just don't find the "plot twists" appealing whatsoever.

[Celine Dijon]

Автор сообщения: Nissiku

TL;DR: Ghosts WERE real. Only Andrew could see them. Priest is the "demon". It's kinda Silent Hill in the end.

The priest was conducting some sort of ritual in 1692, possibly to gain what he believed was "immortality" and he became "demon". Ritual was calling for 5 sacrificial victims: one suffocated, one hanged, one impaled, one crushed, and one burnt. Initial ritual been successful, but the priest should have repeat it periodically, sacrificing same people's reincarnations (that were trapped in town) the same ways. Abraham/Andrew seemingly was trapped in this cycle by his own guilt, and, as only one who was not bound by the priest's ritual, he can brake the cycle and save all victims. He failed to do it in 1972, and were given another chance in present day.* So ghosts, time travel - all was real, but only Andrew could perceive them.

*Interestingly, he was given that chance BEFORE the start of another cycle it seems.

Eh, I don't buy this. For me it was just Anthony finally having to come to grips with what happened to his family and whether he was going to condemn his little sister or not. Ghosts were definitely not real IMO.

EDIT: Wrong name. Lmfao god bless.

[Solidus's Revenge]

Автор сообщения: Blank

Автор сообщения: Nissiku

TL;DR: Ghosts WERE real. Only Andrew could see them. Priest is the "demon". It's kinda Silent Hill in the end.

The priest was conducting some sort of ritual in 1692, possibly to gain what he believed was "immortality" and he became "demon". Ritual was calling for 5 sacrificial victims: one suffocated, one hanged, one impaled, one crushed, and one burnt. Initial ritual been successful, but the priest should have repeat it periodically, sacrificing same people's reincarnations (that were trapped in town) the same ways. Abraham/Andrew seemingly was trapped in this cycle by his own guilt, and, as only one who was not bound by the priest's ritual, he can brake the cycle and save all victims. He failed to do it in 1972, and were given another chance in present day.* So ghosts, time travel - all was real, but only Andrew could perceive them.

*Interestingly, he was given that chance BEFORE the start of another cycle it seems.

Eh, I don't buy this. For me it was just Andrew finally having to come to grips with what happened to his family and whether he was going to condemn his little sister or not. Ghosts were definitely not real IMO.

I agree. I think it's pretty clear if you look at all of the context of the game that it's just meant to be a story about Anthony dealing with his trauma. In the curator's cut, you can go into Anthony's room and it's made pretty clear that he's obsessed with the witchcraft history/lore. He also has a book about witchcraft with him in the bus. So that's why he imagines things happening the way they do. But I suppose if you really wanted to leave the door open for the supernatural, you could still say that he's obsessed with that stuff because of some connection to the past.

[Solidus's Revenge]

Автор сообщения: Blank

Автор сообщения: Solidus's Revenge

You are the one that decides whether or not you are invested in the characters/plot. If you don't like it, that's fine. I'm not saying you should. I just disagreed with your conclusion that since they are not "real" people, they don't matter or are "useless".

Right, and for me (and if you look at the negative reviews, I'm far from the only one who felt this way.) it makes the characters feel utterly useless. For other games, that's fine, but in a game where the literal goal is to keep everyone alive, it feels pointless when those characters are literally only in the head of another. There is no sense of accomplishment or sadness when they live/die because they DO NOT EXIST. Finding out that losing Taylor/Daniel meant nothing because they were never real... as I said the overall experience was made VERY cheap. But we both have our opinions and that's cool

EDIT: And trust me, I get the deeper meaning of the overall story, I just don't find the "plot twists" appealing whatsoever.

I can definitely understand people's disappointment. Although I enjoyed the game, I still think the ending feels a little sudden and underwhelming. And I can see why people wouldn't feel as invested in the characters. Also, I'm not here to try to change anyone's mind, just discuss.

I guess for me it still works, because I think of saving the various characters as being part of saving Anthony's life or sanity, so it's still important. However, I do wish the ending played with this idea more specifically, such as maybe having Anthony appear less mentally stable or more depressed if more of the characters die.

I don't know for sure yet, but I actually suspect there may be some of this kind of thing in the game. Some of the premonitions show different circumstances for adult Anthony (such as holding a gun to his head and getting arrested) that were not shown in my two endings so far (only one person died each time). So I'm genuinely curious to see what happens when I both save everyone and I intentionally let everyone die.

As maybe that last bit reveals, the enjoyment I get out of these types of games is seeing all the variations in how the story and endings can play out. So I guess that's why one weak ending doesn't bother me too much.

[mutantbeth]

Only demons there are are anthonys inner demons. The little girl was abused both in coloniel times and during anthonys childhood so perhaps she developed some sort of mental illness thing to help her cope and feel less alone

[THE VERY REVEREND MISTER BONK]

And I would have gotten away too with it if it weren't for you meddlin kids...

[Hagala]

When you look into the game files, you can see the creature behind Megan is a slender man. I was disappointed at first that it wasn't a "real" demon, but it makes more sense like that. To me, Megan was just lonely and misanderstood, being a new adopted kid with siblings who've all been there for years, she was like a black sheep. Anthony was the most indulgent with her because he used to be in her shoes, Dennis and Tanya having been James and Anne's children for far longer than Anthony, and then years later, Megan. Anthony could probably sense a special bond between Dennis and Tanya ( like they were real siblings, something he or Megan could never achieve with each other, or with Dennis and/or Tanya ) and his confused mind put them as a romantic couple in 2019 as a consequence, putting himself as an outsider once more. Megan made up an imaginary friend who would listen to her, because she says nobody sees her in her family. The fact that we can see it shouldn't mean much, since we see Andrew's hallucinations.

And she didn't mean real harm in the prologue, she was just bitter and tried being a brat by locking everyone in and Anthony out as soon as the occasion arised, but her intention was only to piss them off for attention. She's just a kid and didn't mean to forget a doll next to the fire. Mary does say in the final trial that she never meant actual harm to anybody in the town. They did give petty reasons for her lying about Amy and Tabitha ( chastising her and taking her doll away ) and Mary wasn't the one who decided they would be killed for that. She didn't accuse David nor Joseph. And since this is all in Anthony's head, he couldn't have himself as the "enemy" in this fantasy of his, so he put Megan instead as the vilain, because they were both in the same kind of guilt : the rest of the family died because of them both been clumsy, Anthony by leaving the stove unattended, and Megan by leaving her doll next to the stove. If you accuse Mary in the trial, she does yell at Andrew that "this is all on your head" and that's also why accusing her and having her executed pushes Andrew to commit suicide later, if he has the gun. If you admit that Megan killed everyone in 1970 ( by being clumsy/unattentive ) so did Anthony.

If you accuse the doll instead, Anthony comes to the conclusion that it was only a mistake that couldn't have been predicted and avoided and that these things happen, sometimes with dramatic consequences, but it was none of his ( or Megan's ) fault. If you accuse an obscure third party ( the priest ) it means what happened was completly out of his control and grasp, something he couldn't even see then and will never see now after all these years, real answers or culprits impossible to find. Both of those two endings have him on the way to maybe one day forgive himself, but accusing Mary is fully admiting irredeemable guilt.

If you had the family behave the whole game as cowards, it's also putting more blame on Anthony because that means he should have protected them. It's important to note that in the prologue, every single one of them calls out for Anthony, begging for help. He heard them all ( the last thing he heard from them ) and wasn't fast enough to help or smart enough to give good enough advices. If you had them being brave and behave as team players in the game, it means they should have been able to save themselves in 1970, that they had it in them and that them dying once the fire broke wasn't enterily on Anthony's shoulders. That's why he also kills himself with the gun if John, Angela, Daniel and Taylor all die, why he has them die at the demons' hands in the burnt house if they were selfish, cowardly, helpless ; to punish himself for not been there for them, by watching them die again. That's why it's also important to have the hallucinations survive.

Everything has to do with the family and how Anthony/Megan felt out of place when they were alive, and guilty for killing them after they were dead. This is why the theme picked for the game is witch hunting, real witches in these times were all about feeling self-hatred and guilt for things that were out of their control. Anthony needs to understand he's not a monster despite what everyone else and even himself wants to believe.