The final ending is about Chloe's choice... not Max's. (Developing a thought.) SPOILERS

[mistabobdobolina]

(This idea came clear for me in a post on another thread, but I thought it was worth talking about without burying it in twenty pages of comments.)

Giving some further thought to arguments over the ending, the criticisms of it that I can most relate to (even if I don't quite agree with them) are: a) that the ending effectively tells Max that doing nothing is better than using her powers, and b) that it involves Max sacrificing Chloe in order to possibly save a relatively abstract population that she doesn't have nearly as personal a connection with.

They're both criticisms that I understand... but in the end they fail to move me. In asking myself why I finally realized that it's because for me, the final ending isn't about Max's choices. It's about Chloe's choice. (This is not to say that I sympathize too much with the "choices didn't matter" crowd, since we get to see Max's choices play out in considerable detail prior to the last act. But there was never any reasonable prospect of Max resolving the tornado storyline by playing girl detective. That resolution in the end turns out to belong to Chloe, whose death sets the whole story in motion... and that's fitting.)

The "sacrifice Chloe" ending isn't about Max killing Chloe.
Max doesn't even have the prospect of "sacrificing" Chloe without Chloe bringing the idea up and giving her the means to do it. The sacrifice in its entirety is Chloe's decision to die for the greater good. What Max is faced with is either respecting that, or choosing to reject it and keeping Chloe alive against her express wishes.

Why does Chloe choose the sacrifice? It's not because she's some Jesus-like altruist trying to save "Arcadia Bay," though in fairness she does mention not wanting her family obliterated and that makes sense. But it's more about something else.

Chloe's choice -- and her story -- is about Rachel.
Chloe clearly loves Max, of course, and is happy to have the chance to reunite with her and adventure with her and work out some of the issues she had about their friendship. But in the end Max is an old childhood friend, a welcome reminder of a once-idyllic past. She isn't a person with whom Chloe has shared anything close to an adult relationship or friendship or romantic love. The person she's shared at least some and possibly (it's implied) all those things with is Rachel.

In other words, Rachel -- not Max -- is Chloe's sine qua non, that without which she cannot (and doesn't want to) live. If Max is her past, Rachel had long since been her future.

This is signposted throughout the game. Chloe's worst breakdowns all involve news about Rachel: her affair with Frank (Chloe seems like a jilted lover), her captivity in the darkroom, the final unavoidable fact of her death. After that point, Chloe is clearly so intent on revenge for Rachel that she's willing to risk anything, including her own life (and even Max's) to achieve it. (As we see outside the Vortex Club in Ep. 5, Max can only talk her out of this with major effort and some extremely heavy guilt-tripping. Which is consistent with everything else to that point.)

I've seen people say that they can't accept that sacrificing Chloe means she dies essentially (she thinks) unloved and alone in that bathroom. I can relate. But here's the thing: nobody is in a better position to know what that means than Chloe. She was that girl in that bathroom facing that gun. But she was also still, in that moment, in a world where there was hope that Rachel might be alive... and a world where her memory of her love for Rachel was still untainted. She knows exactly what it means to choose between that death and living in a world without Rachel. And her choice makes it absolutely clear: she doesn't want to live in a world without Rachel. Not even if it means having Max back in her life.

This moment is the end of innocence for Max not because it's teaching her that her powers can only do evil or about some more nebulous greater good... but because she's faced with the fact that her love for Chloe simply can't change the hold that the ghost of Rachel has over Chloe's life. She has to choose to let Chloe go. It's an inescapably adult decision, the moment of realizing that your life and choices can't always be about you.

This realization deepens my respect for the "sacrifice Chloe" ending (which I already preferred) considerably... and makes me not really want an ending where we're dwelling even more on the reality where Max rejected her friend's choice, and Chloe is still with her out of a no-doubt-genuine but still kind of obligated gratitude. Respecting Chloe's choice gives a nobility to her death and a full measure of respect of her love for Rachel... and it gives Max a full measure of respect for being able to see and come to terms with that, however painful.

Well played, DONTNOD.

[Valdyr]

Originally posted by mistabobdobolina:

She was that girl in that bathroom facing that gun.

Totally disagree with your interpretation that Chloe values Rachel more than she does Max, but I'm not interested in trying to prove your opinion is wrong. The main thing I want to contest is the statement I quoted. You're right, she was that girl, but she isn't anymore. When they both exist simultaneously at different points in a timeline, they are effectively different people. The Chloe on Monday doesn't understand any of this, and the Chloe on Friday has no right to decide that she's going to die. I think your argument would be stronger if the Chloe on Friday who offers to sacrifice herself was the same person as the Chloe who actually gets sacrificed, though even then I would question Chloe's motivations as well as whether it's acceptable for someone else to die to fix something Max believes she caused, even if she offers to.

[Jeckenn]

I don't agree. The whole game was about me as Max trying to rebond with my bff that she had ignored for the past 5 years and now at the end I am supposed to abandon her? No can't do it, won't do it, would never even consider it, except to see what happened then I quickly replayed it so that Chloe is still with Max.

Max never asked anyone for the time powers all of a sudden she just had them. She never once tried to do anything wrong with them except to get into the prinicpal's office but that almost any highschool kid could be seen doing and with Chloe around that is bound to happen. Every other time Max used her powers she used them to help people and only a few times she used them to somewhat help herself in very minor ways like giving the right answers in class. She could have immediately gone to the closest ATM machine and withdraw her money rewind and keep doing that until the machine was empty, hand the money to Chloe and allow her friend to pay her debt off with Frank, she didn't do that. There would be no record of it on the ATM or banks computers because the rewind would erase it and even erase the securtity camera footage so it would be the perfect crime. Still Max is too good a person to even consider doing something like that. To cover her tracks she could even make a small withdrawl at the very end and leave that one so there is evidence that she withdrew $20 and that is why her finger prints are there.

I can't imagine a world where Max could be a sane person after abandoning her bff like the sacrifice Chloe ending presented she would slowly slide into depression and likely die from it because Max and Chloe are destined to be together. Arcadia Bay has to save itself and I don't see how that possibly can rest on the shoulders of a teenage girl.

Not to mention the storm was coming well before Max ever met Chloe in that game, in fact the opening scene showed Max at the lighthouse in the vision of the storm. At that point she had done nothing to save Chloe and did not even know she had time powers, so it is complete and total ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ that the storm has anything to do with Chloe being saved by Max.

[mistabobdobolina]

Originally posted by Valdyr:

You're right, she was that girl, but she isn't anymore. When they both exist simultaneously at different points in a timeline, they are effectively different people.

They're not different people. One grew out of the other, and that one is the only person in existence who knows what it really means to sacrifice the alternate existence in which Max resurrected her for the world in which she didn't. She's not killing some random stranger, it's an informed choice made by someone who also knows exactly what that girl would have felt, both for good and ill, on living through the week she just lived through.

[Palatine Katinka]

Chloe doesn't make the choice. Max does. Chloe states that Max is the only one who can make the choice and that she believes Max will have made the right decision whatever she chooses. While she is the one to suggest that letting her die at the start of the week may be an option, she leaves the final decision to Max and respects Max's choice.

[DrTaco]

I really agree with you here, couldn't of put it better myself.

[mistabobdobolina]

Palatine: It's semantics at a certain point. Chloe gives her the means of making a choice and says clearly "I think I should accept my fate" in a context where it's clear that's a reference to her death. She does leaven it afterwards with "no matter what you choose" but she has clearly indicated the choice she thinks is right.

[jxschie]

Actually, I agree with you. Chloe may not have the ability to outright make that choice, but she plants the seed in Max's mind, tells her it's okay and wishes she would do that. In that way, Max is as much a vessel to what Chloe wants as Max's power is a vessel to what Max wants. I actually thought this as I was watching the ending, too. Max realizes what she's done, Chloe realizes what she's done, but it's not until Chloe throws out there what Max should do that Max considers it.

[GarbageCollector]

Originally posted by mistabobdobolina:

Originally posted by Valdyr:

You're right, she was that girl, but she isn't anymore. When they both exist simultaneously at different points in a timeline, they are effectively different people.

They're not different people. One grew out of the other, and that one is the only person in existence who knows what it really means to sacrifice the alternate existence in which Max resurrected her for the world in which she didn't. She's not killing some random stranger, it's an informed choice made by someone who also knows exactly what that girl would have felt, both for good and ill, on living through the week she just lived through.

I think this is the best it's been put in the entire forums.

[Sunsetter]

Originally posted by mistabobdobolina:

They're not different people. One grew out of the other, and that one is the only person in existence who knows what it really means to sacrifice the alternate existence in which Max resurrected her for the world in which she didn't. She's not killing some random stranger, it's an informed choice made by someone who also knows exactly what that girl would have felt, both for good and ill, on living through the week she just lived through.

Given the circumstances (time travel, time lines, different version of people), they are absolutely not the same. A same person would act the same way on one given choice. And the younger Chloe certainly wouldn't choose to sacrifice herself because she has doesn't have the older one's memory. The older one doesn't have the right to decide for the younger one.

[ASRIEL]

If Chloe is destined to die, what would destroying Arcadia Bay really solve?

You'd have been responsible for a mass grave while having the Reaper's shadow right behind you and Chloe both, depending on proximity. Always behind Chloe either way.

[TargetLost]

Surprised me a bit that so many choose to keep Chloe since it was indeed not only a moraly decision but also the decision of Chloe herself.

If she said she want to be with max and marry her and have a happy live or whatever than it had been a real though decision.

[Sera]

I think the opinion that Chloe is doomed is a little off.

I would attribute the fact that in that short time period both of them are at significantly higher risk considering the lengths they go to in order to dig up the truth (sorry Rach)

So if you add the inherent danger of their pursuit (Dealing with Frank) seperately to say.. probability of freak accidents (Train Job) I would say Max is in just as much danger since she has several moments where she has to rewind to save herself from being killed or severely injured (Destroyed Town, Diner with Frank, that wily loose car by the firepit in the junkyard.)

[Remy]

Originally posted by TargetLost:

Surprised me a bit that so many choose to keep Chloe since it was indeed not only a moraly decision but also the decision of Chloe herself.

If she said she want to be with max and marry her and have a happy live or whatever than it had been a real though decision.

But remember, Chloe left the decision for Max to make, she only gave her some reasons why she shouldn't live. As many players reasoned, Chloe isn't exactly worth all those lives lost, but it focuses on the objective Max has set for herself in the beginning: saving Chloe.

[Sera]

Originally posted by ReminemRapperChef:

But remember, Chloe left the decision for Max to make, she only gave her some reasons why she shouldn't live. As many players reasoned, Chloe isn't exactly worth all those lives lost, but it focuses on the objective Max has set for herself in the beginning: saving Chloe.

This is why I think the nightmare sequences are so fitting to add closure to Max's final decision. I think there is a lot of play on a teenagers fear of the unknown and a lot of things are assumed that dont actually happen. This is a recurring theme throughout the game. The game makes a player think that something will definitely happen that is more likely not possible at all and tries to feed that with smoke and mirrors. The nightmare in the diner seems to build the assumption that destroying Arcadia is going to definitely kill everyone and it guilt trips you ceaselessly. People are all uncharacteristically chastising Max for wanting to kill them its more a product of Max's own fear and doubt driving her to a certain choice later on. It would only make sense that she is then countering this doubt with real memories of her and Chloe in an effort to support a certain other choice. Thats how I read it so when the time came I had no problem keeping Chloe.

Also.. interesting to note that when the two are driving through Arcadia there are almost no bodies one of the bodies out on the road is rather purposefully covered. Reinforces my belief that casualties were not as drastic as was implied.

[sarahisstrange]

Originally posted by Valdyr:

Originally posted by mistabobdobolina:

She was that girl in that bathroom facing that gun.

Totally disagree with your interpretation that Chloe values Rachel more than she does Max, but I'm not interested in trying to prove your opinion is wrong. The main thing I want to contest is the statement I quoted. You're right, she was that girl, but she isn't anymore. When they both exist simultaneously at different points in a timeline, they are effectively different people. The Chloe on Monday doesn't understand any of this, and the Chloe on Friday has no right to decide that she's going to die. I think your argument would be stronger if the Chloe on Friday who offers to sacrifice herself was the same person as the Chloe who actually gets sacrificed, though even then I would question Chloe's motivations as well as whether it's acceptable for someone else to die to fix something Max believes she caused, even if she offers to.

No way Rachel is valued more than Max. Didn't Chloe say blah blah blah "show me your love and friendship, like I haven't been in YEARS?"