Honestly this game is lifeless

[Igris]

Wish it had a spirit like the first season

[mcramer451]

And im fine with a more linear storyline. I get that. Just make the choices more like between "lets rob the F outta this thing!" - makind Daniel more hardened, or "we have no other choice" - which makes him less aholey.

Not a choice that makes it seem like you can opt out altogether

[HecklerVane]

Originally posted by mcramer451:

I think they care more about the message that the game is portraying, rather than keeping to any spirit of real choice like the 1st 2 games.

If the heist was something that needed to be done to move the plot forward to get the story to a certain point - then don't make it seem like you can opt out of it. I think that's a reasonable thing that most people are irritated about when they point out how choice don't matter

LIS 1 has balance between those two things. I thought that they had bigger budget now, the choices and consequences would have more depth. We have 2 episodes left. So..

Oh yeah the heist part really upsets me. They even made the choice between agreeing and refusing to do the heist looks like a major choice AND WE ENDED UP DOING IT ANYWAY.

[aleksanderbarda]

Originally posted by Red Spider Lily:

Lastly, I'm sure this will make me sound like an "SJW", but I'll say it: I'm more annoyed how the same-sex romance option is tied into doing something morally ambiguous and reckless, while the straight romance option is presented as morally righteous and principled. I would hope disagreeing/agreeing to the heist has it's pros and cons on both sides. Otherwise, it feels really uneven in how the game presents it. The heist happens anyways, but the game also makes it clear how foolhardy and morally wrong it is....

Agree completely! I even got the sense that game pushing you towards making a straight relationship. Not only because of Finn personality (though it IS awful that the same-gender person is ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ abuser) but because Cass has simply more time with Daniel (not sure but feels like it). Of course there was the same thing with LiS 1 — but there homosexual relationships were obvious, not straight.
And it's not just about the heist. It's like Dontnod says 'sorry guys, we were wrong saying homosexual pair is OK. Don't be gay for the third time'. WHY, DONTNOD?

[talemore]

First people complained choices don't matter and then people complain when them do.

From the first to the last episode of LIS Max is gay. She wrote she was gay in the first page of her diary. She write how she's gay when you don't kiss and she's having a gay romance with Courtney in a place where none of the events never happened. Chloe even admit them being a gay couple at the swimming pool even when you don't make any choices toward a relation. But please, don't make a single choice who matter because then we can point at the right and the wrong path.

[Sparkless20]

Originally posted by Red Spider Lily:

I think the whole deal with the heist being a choice is less about the action of it, but rather the effect it will have on Daniel (...if that makes sense?).

Yes it makes complet sense to me. ^^

Originally posted by Red Spider Lily:

Yes, the heist happens regardless, but Daniel's attitude towards you is different depending on whether you agree to it or not. If you ask Daniel if he wants to do the heist, Daniel sees how you trust him. Throughout the episode, Daniel makes it clear he feels like Sean doesn't take him seriously or spend enough time with him. Maybe one positive aspect of doing the heist is showing Daniel that you are willing to stay by his side and give him a chance to prove himself. The negative, of course, is that you're putting your brother at risk in a dangerous situation and potentially teaching him that stealing is okay.

The positive of disagreeing to the heist is obvious: you are taking a moral stand against using your little brother's powers to steal from drug dealers. Maybe after the tension dies down and the two brothers reunite, Daniel will understand why you didn't want to endanger him in exchange for getting loads of cash. On the other hand, perhaps there's a negative to disagreeing to the heist as well: you show Daniel that you aren't willing to let him make his own choices and mistakes, and you have no faith in him or his capabilities. If you also romanced Cassidy, Daniel feels even more ignored and belittled.

I think agreeing or disagreeing to the heist will have repercussions down the line for Daniel and his relationship with Sean. It sucks that is happens regardless, but LIS2 is not a big triple-A game like Detroit: Become Human where you have multiple variations of how certain things can go.

That is what I think, too. Alson the whole heist thing was no realy a choice. Daniel made the choice and that was what this episode was about. Showing first signs of independance but also still asking for help if needed. Daniel is now in a phase were he is learning when to ask for what and at the start it is very confusing. That's why he is always angry when Sean goes to be with him or not. He doesn't know what to do. I bet Daniel realy wanted to go to bed with Sean but he didn't want to seem uncool to the others so he sad. "You don't have to come with me." it is not against Sean in that moment but just Daniel beeing angry at the situation. He understands his bro can't always be there for him and that Sean don't deserve this mean additute, but he doesn't know were to point this anger.
A good example is the scene before Sean can ask for the watch. When Seans says: "I am the adult now." Daniel is a salty and responds: "Well, that sucks!" Meaning he knows Sean has a responsibilitly but he is angry that it is the way it is. He want's to take some responsibility but forgets that he is still a child and not able to make tough calls:

"I am not a kid anymore." Daniel's famous rage scene at the lake.
"I know I am not always nice to you, but things aren't nice anymore." Daniel in the tent when you went to bed with Daniel.
"I can do what I want!" Daniel screaming when you are agains the heist.

Always imply he not exactly angry at Sean but angry at the situation.

Also other small things change when you compare it.

In episode 1:

Daniel could be angry at Sean the morning after the forest chapter, if Sean called him out in ep. 1 and he had a bad night.

The dialiughe chages when Daniel finds out about his dad.

In ep 2. are a lot of hidden "warnings"
Sean can ispect the house and there are a lot of clues.
A window can be broken
A picture of the family of the original oweners will be defaced by him or not.
A picture frame will be broken or not
When Daniel wins the dice game he will draw either a pou (Sh**) or Mushroom on Sean's backpack.
When Sean asks Daniel to tidy up he could do it or not.
When Sean is telling Daniel not to lie Daniel could disobey him and lie anyway to Chris resulting the best ending not to happen.

I episode 3 Daniel will wait for Sean after the knife throwing scene or not.
He also will not allow Sean to help him with the dishes and also not offer to help Sean with the tanks.
His additute towards Sean will be more aggro.
If Sean already spend to much time with Cass (stood up for her agains Big J and agreed with her while weed cutting) and other stuff to get on her good side, Daniel will call Sean out for that. And if Sean continunes he will attack her when she is in the heist.

Originally posted by Red Spider Lily:

Lastly, I'm sure this will make me sound like an "SJW", but I'll say it: I'm more annoyed how the same-sex romance option is tied into doing something morally ambiguous and reckless, while the straight romance option is presented as morally righteous and principled. I would hope disagreeing/agreeing to the heist has it's pros and cons on both sides. Otherwise, it feels really uneven in how the game presents it. The heist happens anyways, but the game also makes it clear how foolhardy and morally wrong it is....

I am okay with that because the romance isn't the focus in LiS 2. Finn's only thing in mind was the heist so sex is out of question for him at that moment. It would be cool if it wasn't limited but I am okay with what we got.

Originally posted by Red Spider Lily:

I guess we'll have to wait until Episode 4 to see what happens concerning this decision.

Edit: I do agree though that Hugo from A Plague Tale: Innocence is a much better character. At 5 years old, he still has his moments of disobedience and moodiness like any child, but he's also more mature than Daniel in how he interacts with his sister and their horrific situation. I get the point the developers are trying to make with Daniel, but it does feel like they're changing his attitude to serve the plot instead of having it happen naturally. Daniel disobeying Sean and sneaking into Merrill's office during pay day annoyed me way more than the heist, for some reason.

Here I have to disagree. For me Hugo didn't acted like a 5 year old boy who lived behind walls his whole live. He listene'd to a person he barely knew and did show very little to no emotions though the game like fear or sadness. Exept in some cutscenes but barely. One fact could be this was playing in another time were children weren't spoiled so much like nowadays and he was growing up in a world invested with plague, but he was acting more like duble the age he truly is imo. Also Plague tale is a complete different type of game. The story isn't so deep but the gameplay is more focussed.

[Metalhen]

Originally posted by Sparkless20:

I episode 3 Daniel will wait for Sean after the knife throwing scene or not.
He also will not allow Sean to help him with the dishes and also not offer to help Sean with the tanks.
His additute towards Sean will be more aggro.
If Sean already spend to much time with Cass (stood up for her agains Big J and agreed with her while weed cutting) and other stuff to get on her good side, Daniel will call Sean out for that. And if Sean continunes he will attack her when she is in the heist.

That's the problem in a way. I played the "perfect bro" and had Daniel listen and obey to me during episode 1 and 2 no prob at all. But during 3 and even if, like you said, things can be worse when you weren't A-Okay with him :
- He still attacks you with his power after the knife throwing scene, which shoked me senseless since, having had a good relationship with him up til then, it came basically out of nowhere. For me, Daniel became an "ennemy" from that scene onwards. Cause who attacks his beloved older brother and only relative that way ?
- He allowed me to help with the dishes and offered his help with the tanks... and complained the whole way. I almost regretted accepting his offer. IRL I just f****** HATE people who offers their help only to complain about how it bothers them one way or the other the whole week ! It's hypocritical, period !
- I didn't get the feeling his attitude was that much more aggro. He still refused to listen, disobeys, put everyone in danger and didn't even seem to regret it. IDK dude, you like Finn so much, don't you feel bad he didn't get paid and ended up (maybe) hurt because of the stunt you pulled ?
- I only spent time with Cass when I got the tatoo (and the whole tent thing oc but by then, Daniel and Finn were already out doing stuff behind our backs)... and Daniel still got angry af and attacked her. That's what people also mean with choices that don't matter. Was it so hard to nuance that ? Spend all your time with Cass and she is attacked. Spend only one choice with her and she isn't or just gets hurt accidentally during the whole fiasco.

So no, Daniel's attitude is ♥♥♥♥♥♥, whatever relationship you had with him prior to 3 and that's what feels off and not rewarding. IDK if you played Detroit but if you want to see a true game with similar gameplay that does choices and consequences and relationships right (and the kid in there is a believable 9-10 years-old too), this is the one.

Originally posted by Sparkless20:

Here I have to disagree. For me Hugo didn't acted like a 5 year old boy who lived behind walls his whole live. He listene'd to a person he barely knew and did show very little to no emotions though the game like fear or sadness. Exept in some cutscenes but barely. One fact could be this was playing in another time were children weren't spoiled so much like nowadays and he was growing up in a world invested with plague, but he was acting more like duble the age he truly is imo. Also Plague tale is a complete different type of game. The story isn't so deep but the gameplay is more focussed.

We'll have to agree to disagree on that one. As someone who worked with 4-6 years-old for years, from all backgrounds, I can assure you Hugo acted like a normal if shy 5 years-old confronted with murder and sickness. Some children tend to become a bit withdrawn and quiet when witnessing violent things, to give themselves time to analyse what's going on and try and draw their own conclusions, however false or childish. It can give them an air of maturity but they are just processing their traumas and trying to deal with everything at once.

I don't know who you are refering to when you say he listens to strangers... If it's his sister, well, even if he barely knew her, he still was told she is his sister and will care for him so it's normal to latch onto her.
If it's the priest and the Dath Vader-style inquisitor, he is not so young that he can't understand they are threatening his mother and a boy his age will do anything to protect his dear mommy. Sure they turned him against his sister but it was easy considering he was already angry with her for hidding things from him.

At 5, children do know that people die and do not come back but at the same time, it's still a bit hard to fathom especially if, like Hugo, they were sheltered behind walls and never had to deal with the sick and dying and let's not talk about fresh corpses. A child that age will easily get angry and wish death on someone (you often hear young quarelling brothers/sisters saying "I hope you disappear !" "I wish you could just go and die !"). If they had the power to hurt someone, they would use it in a fit. Not entirely realizing that if they kill them, there will be no making up and rewinding time after that, what's done is done.

That's where I feel Daniel f**** up a 100 times because a 9 years-old from the 21st century normally understands that turning against someone, hurting and killing them, is a big deal. Him not realizing the gravity of what he is doing and the extent of his dangerous powers would be understandable if he was 5, not at 9 and especially considering he grew up reading comics and fanboying over super-heroes ;p

[HecklerVane]

Originally posted by Red Spider Lily:

I think the whole deal with the heist being a choice is less about the action of it, but rather the effect it will have on Daniel (...if that makes sense?).

Yes it makes sense. But that's it? It only affecting Daniel's attitude? Come on. I get it that somehow or someway the story will follow to a linear path. But atleast don't make it seem like there's two different choices that branches into two different paths.

[Scorpion242]

Originally posted by HecklerVane:

Yes it makes sense. But that's it? It only affecting Daniel's attitude? Come on. I get it that somehow or someway the story will follow to a linear path. But atleast don't make it seem like there's two different choices that branches into two different paths.

Yes, that´s it. you got points on the "Daniel likes you" counter which may or may not result in something in the following episodes which you may or may not recognize. With Daniel´s depiction in Episode 3 they could just throw away all previous decisions and randomly generate his reaction every time. The result would be the same.
And that is what people usually call decisions not mattering in LiS2.

Originally posted by Sparkless20:

Here I have to disagree. For me Hugo didn't acted like a 5 year old boy who lived behind walls his whole live. He listene'd to a person he barely knew and did show very little to no emotions though the game like fear or sadness. Exept in some cutscenes but barely. One fact could be this was playing in another time were children weren't spoiled so much like nowadays and he was growing up in a world invested with plague, but he was acting more like duble the age he truly is imo. Also Plague tale is a complete different type of game. The story isn't so deep but the gameplay is more focussed.

The story is quite similar, older sibling taking care of a younger one, alone, hunted by the local "law", occasinally helped by strangers. It is more gameplay focussed, but the story and characters are better and more likeable.
And when you say Hugo is acting like someone twice his age then that would put him in the same age bracket as Daniel and only enforce how Hugo is the better character - a character who acts out but you don´t want to have written out of the story.

[Sparkless20]

Originally posted by Scorpion242:

Originally posted by HecklerVane:

Yes it makes sense. But that's it? It only affecting Daniel's attitude? Come on. I get it that somehow or someway the story will follow to a linear path. But atleast don't make it seem like there's two different choices that branches into two different paths.

Yes, that´s it. you got points on the "Daniel likes you" counter which may or may not result in something in the following episodes which you may or may not recognize. With Daniel´s depiction in Episode 3 they could just throw away all previous decisions and randomly generate his reaction every time. The result would be the same.
And that is what people usually call decisions not mattering in LiS2.

Originally posted by Sparkless20:

Here I have to disagree. For me Hugo didn't acted like a 5 year old boy who lived behind walls his whole live. He listene'd to a person he barely knew and did show very little to no emotions though the game like fear or sadness. Exept in some cutscenes but barely. One fact could be this was playing in another time were children weren't spoiled so much like nowadays and he was growing up in a world invested with plague, but he was acting more like duble the age he truly is imo. Also Plague tale is a complete different type of game. The story isn't so deep but the gameplay is more focussed.

The story is quite similar, older sibling taking care of a younger one, alone, hunted by the local "law", occasinally helped by strangers. It is more gameplay focussed, but the story and characters are better and more likeable.
And when you say Hugo is acting like someone twice his age then that would put him in the same age bracket as Daniel and only enforce how Hugo is the better character - a character who acts out but you don´t want to have written out of the story.

Now I am asking myself even more why you are still here...
You like PT and I like LiS2. And here we are writing in a LiS2 dedicated forum... >.> Seems like you like LiS2 still enough to let it waste your time you could spend otherwise, like playing PT for example.
Jokes on you.

[Riddler]

Originally posted by Metalhen:

So no, Daniel's attitude is ♥♥♥♥♥♥, whatever relationship you had with him prior to 3 and that's what feels off and not rewarding. IDK if you played Detroit but if you want to see a true game with similar gameplay that does choices and consequences and relationships right (and the kid in there is a believable 9-10 years-old too), this is the one.

Well, it's not about rewarding you for anything. It's about telling a story. I think the developers once said in an interview that one of the things they wanted to show in this episode is that relationships can deteriorate even if you have the best intentions and you don't always have control over everything.

I think it's the completely wrong approach to understand the choices you make as a kind of gameplay element that rewards you for making the right choices. It's more about what you feel about the choices and what you think is right. There are no right or wrong decisions. As in Season 1, your decisions don't change the plot. The behavior of different people can be different, they can talk to you about other things, or the way they behave toward you changes.

There are real differences only when this part of the plot or the character in question is no longer relevant. That's why Finn can live or die in this episode, because we probably won't see him again afterwards. Or his appearance has no influence on the story if he survives.

And Daniel as the central plot element can't be influenced in that form. Because his behavior and his alienation from Sean are intended by the story and that's why it has to happen that way. You can make sure that he doesn't curse anymore, that he helps Sean with his tasks, that he doesn't steal anything and so on. Nothing more. In the end Daniel still makes his own decisions.

And the comparison with Detroit is not quite fair either. Quantic Dream has much bigger budgets and also a completely different demand on how branched the story should be. In LiS there aren't dozens of storylines that split up, run parallel, cross etc. and finally converge again. And i think they doesn't want it either.

But they still expanded this aspect a bit compared to the first season. In Episode 3 we have for the first time quite different playable storylines with the Heist. I hope they'll expand that a bit in the next two episodes.

[aleksanderbarda]

Originally posted by Metalhen:

I think it's the completely wrong approach to understand the choices you make as a kind of gameplay element that rewards you for making the right choices. It's more about what you feel about the choices and what you think is right. There are no right or wrong decisions. As in Season 1, your decisions don't change the plot. The behavior of different people can be different, they can talk to you about other things, or the way they behave toward you changes.

Problem is, devs say the exact oppsite of that — they say that your decisions will affect brothers' relationships. Only... they won't, not really.
What I mean is THAT "As Sean, your choices shape the fates of the Diaz brothers, and the lives of everyone they meet" and THAT "This is the trip that could bond Sean and Daniel forever… or tear their brotherhood apart.". Surely it's not what we see after 3 eps

[Scorpion242]

Originally posted by aleksanderbarda:

What I mean is THAT "As Sean, your choices shape the fates of the Diaz brothers, and the lives of everyone they meet" and THAT "This is the trip that could bond Sean and Daniel forever… or tear their brotherhood apart.". Surely it's not what we see after 3 eps

"It will be totally worth it at the end..."
:)

[aleksanderbarda]

Originally posted by Scorpion242:

"It will be totally worth it at the end..."
:)

We'll see I guess)

[Riddler]

Originally posted by aleksanderbarda:

Originally posted by Metalhen:

I think it's the completely wrong approach to understand the choices you make as a kind of gameplay element that rewards you for making the right choices. It's more about what you feel about the choices and what you think is right. There are no right or wrong decisions. As in Season 1, your decisions don't change the plot. The behavior of different people can be different, they can talk to you about other things, or the way they behave toward you changes.

Problem is, devs say the exact oppsite of that — they say that your decisions will affect brothers' relationships. Only... they won't, not really.
What I mean is THAT "As Sean, your choices shape the fates of the Diaz brothers, and the lives of everyone they meet" and THAT "This is the trip that could bond Sean and Daniel forever… or tear their brotherhood apart.". Surely it's not what we see after 3 eps

It does affect their relationship. But not in a way that it change the whole story. Daniel's behavior is strongly affected by your decisions. You can have a very bad Daniel or a better Daniel. But that doesn't change the fact, that the story tear them apart at one point. Daniel is not a robot, he is a character in a story.

And that last sentence you quoted sounds like a description for a random movie, because it's describing the potential course of the story. And we still don't know what the ending looks like. Our decisions could very well lead to Sean and Daniel being happily united or hating each other in the end.

The first season also advertised that you could influence the past, present and future. As it turned out, apart from the last decision, you couldn't influence much at all. That's how these games work. You can just personalize the story for yourself, but there is always only one plotline you have to follow. You can alter certain events to happen slightly different, but they happen in one way or another.

[Depenmytyc]

Originally posted by Pat on the back:

Is this game rubbish then? I have played Life is Strange 1, the odd Telltale game and the Quantic Dream games in the past and enjoyed them. I love a good storytelling game and don't mind the long winded conversations and quicktime events if they breathe life into the story or add momentum to the scene. I have of course played the different type of games like Bioshock, Alan Wake, Mass Effect, Witcher, Spec Ops etc for their storytelling :). I really like these sort of games.

No one yet can accurately assess this game. No full release. Two of the five episodes are still in development. If you like Life is Strange 1 you probably will like and the prequel (in my opinion it is not worse than the original).
https://store.steampowered.com/app/554620/Life_is_Strange_Before_the_Storm/