Latest / Critical Error / Who Decided These Games Suck?

Transcript

Who Decided These Games Suck? · Critical Error

• 0:00
  When did everyone decide that we all
• 0:01
  hate High Guard, a video game that
• 0:03
  doesn't even exist yet?
• 0:05
  >> Well, listen. It ended the Game Awards
• 0:07
  this year. It was the finale. It has a
• 0:09
  responsibility to gamers, fans, anyone
• 0:12
  invested in the cultivation.
• 0:13
  >> A critical error is an error which the
• 0:15
  OS cannot reasonably ignore. Sh. Jake
• 0:18
  Steinberg is a streamer, writer, and
• 0:21
  certified yapper. Complimentary. Peter
• 0:23
  Hunt
• 0:25
  tech is a YouTuber, journalist, and
• 0:27
  certified yapper. derogatory. These are
• 0:30
  the things they cannot reasonably
• 0:32
  ignore.
• 0:32
  >> After the Highguard reveal trailer uh at
• 0:34
  the end of the Game Awards last year, I
• 0:37
  didn't really think about that game a
• 0:39
  ton. I feel like I still don't know that
• 0:41
  much about it. But what I do know is
• 0:42
  that we are all supposed to hate it.
• 0:44
  We're supposed to hate it. There is
• 0:45
  something about this hero shooter,
• 0:47
  something about this game that has all
• 0:49
  of the qualities of something that
• 0:51
  doesn't play well online. And I don't
• 0:54
  even think I need to provide all of this
• 0:55
  evidence of the the the the videos and
• 0:57
  the tweets and the articles about how
• 0:59
  we're supposed to hate this game because
• 1:01
  an IGN article just went up today at the
• 1:03
  time of recording called Can We Stop
• 1:06
  Dunking on High Guard before it's even
• 1:09
  out,
• 1:11
  please.
• 1:13
  And I think I want to have a
• 1:15
  conversation today about not just maybe
• 1:19
  why people have been conditioned to hate
• 1:22
  this kind of game. What about this kind
• 1:23
  of game is the siren song to hating it?
• 1:26
  But also, what does the kind of
• 1:29
  readiness of hating this game say about
• 1:31
  the culture and how we talk about games?
• 1:33
  Is that fair?
• 1:34
  >> Yeah, I I I think so. You know, it's
• 1:36
  interesting you
• 1:38
  brought up the idea of sort of everyone
• 1:40
  being primed to dislike this kind of
• 1:43
  game. And it is this kind of game. It is
• 1:45
  like if you say, "Hey, we're doing like
• 1:47
  a hero shooter." Uh people will like
• 1:51
  pull knives out ready to stab this game
• 1:54
  before it even a game like this before
• 1:56
  it even comes out for what is my
• 1:59
  perspective no reason. Like I do not
• 2:02
  understand what the what the hatred
• 2:03
  towards the idea the concept of hero
• 2:05
  shooters is. Um people say the same
• 2:07
  thing about like extraction shooters. I
• 2:09
  think like it is it tends to be like
• 2:12
  multiplayer games in these sort of like
• 2:15
  huge uh uh uh genres. Uh you you look at
• 2:20
  of course like Concord was a huge
• 2:21
  failure from what two years ago. But
• 2:23
  even with Marathon coming up in March
• 2:26
  when they started showing off like hey
• 2:27
  this is what Marathon is starting to
• 2:29
  look like uh last year everyone jumped
• 2:32
  jumped down Marathon's throats and
• 2:34
  everyone's like we do not need another
• 2:35
  hero shooter. We do not need another
• 2:37
  extraction shooter. And then, you know,
• 2:40
  three months pass and Arc Raiders
• 2:42
  becomes the biggest game in the world
• 2:44
  for a while. You know, I don't know if
• 2:45
  that's exactly true, but you understand
• 2:47
  the point I'm trying to make here. It is
• 2:49
  wild that people are just like ready to
• 2:52
  jump on something like this. And I'm I'm
• 2:54
  curious what where that comes from just
• 2:56
  because like I have literally no
• 2:59
  feelings about this video game. Like
• 3:02
  none. Like less less than any. Yes.
• 3:06
  >> Um Yeah. This is such a funny situation.
• 3:08
  So, I want to I want to make a few
• 3:09
  claims and then we can feel free to kind
• 3:12
  of like push back on me in terms of
• 3:13
  yeah, how how accurate you think this
• 3:15
  is. So, my first claim,
• 3:18
  >> the amount that we've even talked about
• 3:20
  High Guard at all after its reveal
• 3:22
  trailer, this is a game from a new
• 3:23
  studio in what some might say is a tired
• 3:26
  genre. The fact that we have talked
• 3:28
  about it at all that it has had this
• 3:29
  much space in the ecosystem to me is
• 3:32
  evidence of just how much power Jeff
• 3:34
  Keley and the Game Awards have. Fair.
• 3:37
  >> Yeah. Yeah. by by having this be the one
• 3:39
  more thing and and having Jeff say like
• 3:41
  I visited the studio. I can't wait to
• 3:42
  play this game.
• 3:44
  >> That is the reason why we are looking at
• 3:45
  this thing. Otherwise, I I think it
• 3:47
  would have uh uh not it would not be in
• 3:50
  in the consciousness the way that it is.
• 3:52
  I think that's fair. And I think beyond
• 3:54
  the kind of quote unquote power that the
• 3:56
  Game Awards has, I think we need to
• 3:59
  specifically lend it culpability to the
• 4:02
  power it has over what is discussed,
• 4:05
  over what people think is important,
• 4:07
  over like people that would tell you day
• 4:10
  in and day out that the the Game Awards
• 4:13
  is just for marketing and it's just
• 4:15
  money and it's not it's not actually it
• 4:18
  doesn't know what's important about the
• 4:19
  industry. It seems to me that like in an
• 4:23
  industry that lacks taste makers, that
• 4:25
  lacks critics, that lacks like voices
• 4:27
  that are able to decide like this is
• 4:29
  what we should be talking about. This is
• 4:31
  what's important. I think you cannot
• 4:33
  deny that the Game Awards is doing that
• 4:36
  by putting this game in that slot. They
• 4:39
  decided it was worthy of your attention,
• 4:41
  whether that be positive or negative.
• 4:43
  >> Yeah. And you know what's interesting
• 4:44
  though too is because Highguard feels
• 4:47
  like so tied to the Game Awards because
• 4:49
  of this. This is the first time I've
• 4:51
  talked about the Game Awards in January.
• 4:54
  Do you know what I mean? Like like like
• 4:57
  late January, no less. Like usually the
• 4:59
  Game Awards sort of like come and go.
• 5:01
  But I think that this is um a a sign to
• 5:05
  what you're saying that the Game Awards
• 5:08
  is at the very least becoming, if it
• 5:10
  isn't already, uh something that does
• 5:12
  have the ability to shape the industry
• 5:13
  and shape the culture surrounding video
• 5:15
  games because we were talking about this
• 5:17
  game that I had never heard of before.
• 5:19
  And uh if high like if I had not heard
• 5:23
  of it from the game awards, I would have
• 5:24
  not heard about it after because uh I
• 5:27
  mean there has been just the one trailer
• 5:29
  from uh Highguard uh that was at the
• 5:31
  Game Awards. It was the like we said the
• 5:33
  one the one more thing from the Game
• 5:35
  Awards and then we have literally
• 5:37
  nothing else to go on from this game. It
• 5:39
  comes out on the 26th 21st today. So
• 5:41
  that's on Monday. Um
• 5:43
  >> so I I will say this. Oh, you have more
• 5:46
  statements. Sorry. Go ahead.
• 5:46
  >> I do. I do. So, I kind of I want to get
• 5:49
  a little bit into that IGN piece, but I
• 5:50
  really kind of want to focus on
• 5:51
  something else because I think what this
• 5:54
  kind of this unraveling story is really
• 5:56
  proving, this obsession with Highgard,
• 5:58
  this obsession with maybe dunking on
• 5:59
  High Guard is not proving anything about
• 6:03
  negativity in particular. I think what
• 6:05
  it's proving really is how much gamers
• 6:09
  and games media love and get attached to
• 6:12
  and cling to a narrative to demonstrate
• 6:16
  some kind of authority to another. There
• 6:20
  is I am supposed to think that high
• 6:23
  guard is bad and by demonstrating how I
• 6:26
  know that it is bad why I will extol
• 6:29
  virtues to my audience. There is an
• 6:31
  undeniable connection on between um the
• 6:36
  video game player who has been
• 6:38
  conditioned to not like the live service
• 6:41
  video game for holistic reasons because
• 6:44
  it is preying on the consumer because it
• 6:46
  is trying to make money and if I can
• 6:48
  recognize the capitalism in my video
• 6:50
  game that is bad and there there's kind
• 6:53
  of been a degree to which gamers have
• 6:55
  been trained to think that live service
• 6:58
  is a dirty word to the point that like
• 7:00
  including that in your games now is
• 7:04
  almost a an invitation to be mocked
• 7:06
  online. Uh if Sony comes out and reveals
• 7:09
  a video game and they say the word live
• 7:11
  service, how do you think that's going
• 7:13
  to be treated by audience? How do you
• 7:15
  how are people going to react to that?
• 7:16
  >> I mean it has been like profoundly
• 7:19
  negative, right? I mean since Sony was
• 7:21
  saying I don't know this was two years
• 7:22
  ago, three years ago at this point when
• 7:24
  they were like we have 12 live service
• 7:26
  games in active development and it's
• 7:28
  like laugh I mean I think that's
• 7:29
  laughable, right? because it's like for
• 7:31
  who to play, you know what I mean? Like
• 7:33
  with what time because people are
• 7:35
  already playing, you know, Simpsons
• 7:36
  Fortnite obviously um day in and day out
• 7:39
  and then whatever other live service
• 7:41
  games people play, right? Um but I I I
• 7:43
  want to hit on something that you
• 7:44
  mentioned here about um
• 7:47
  >> the idea of of people
• 7:50
  this is a safe game to dunk on from
• 7:53
  everyone it sort of seems like. And I
• 7:55
  think what we are constantly searching
• 7:57
  for in uh the games industry
• 8:01
  >> uh not even just the industry but more
• 8:03
  like in gaming culture is to find the
• 8:05
  next permissible thing to dunk on.
• 8:08
  >> And and Highguard is for whatever reason
• 8:11
  the the current permissible thing to say
• 8:13
  well you know this thing is cooked
• 8:15
  before it's even out. Haven't gotten
• 8:17
  another trailer. And I think there is a
• 8:19
  certain amount of like fairness to that,
• 8:22
  right? Usually it's not a great sign
• 8:24
  when a game is about to come out and we
• 8:25
  don't know literally anything about it
• 8:27
  other than what we saw in a uh 2 minute
• 8:29
  and 37 second trailer, right? I think
• 8:32
  that's fair to say that's not like a
• 8:34
  great sign for like a live service game.
• 8:37
  However, I do think that there is this
• 8:39
  odd sort of fascination and fixation
• 8:43
  um from
• 8:46
  people in sort of just the games culture
• 8:49
  to find a thing where they're like, "But
• 8:51
  we all can band together and say this
• 8:53
  thing sucks,
• 8:56
  Peter."
• 8:58
  Oh yeah. Yeah. Oh yeah. There is a
• 9:03
  authority. There is a kind of like Jenna
• 9:07
  Qua I understand video games better than
• 9:10
  some of these people making them
• 9:11
  perspective that emerges from somebody
• 9:14
  who is able to say um people are just so
• 9:18
  tired of live service games which I
• 9:21
  think is um not as true as anybody wants
• 9:25
  to believe. So
• 9:27
  >> it's by the way simply not true.
• 9:30
  >> Simply not true. People are playing a
• 9:32
  [ __ ] ton of live service games all the
• 9:34
  time. New live service games too. I
• 9:36
  mean, you look at like Arc Raiders,
• 9:37
  which you know had its its uh beta
• 9:39
  testing and whatever, but like that get
• 9:40
  [ __ ] huge. I don't remember the
• 9:42
  number. They passed some several million
• 9:45
  sales and whatever um recently. And to
• 9:49
  your point of what you're saying of this
• 9:50
  like signaling and whatever, um I I
• 9:52
  think like I had a hard time sort of
• 9:55
  seeing this uh because it's a kind of a
• 9:57
  shifting moving target because so many
• 9:58
  things like change so often in games
• 10:01
  like I had a hard time seeing it for the
• 10:02
  longest time. But I've seen the way that
• 10:04
  people talk about AI and like there's
• 10:05
  like the words we always use with AI.
• 10:07
  People are always saying AI slop, AI
• 10:09
  slop, AI slop. And I think the reason
• 10:11
  they say AI slop is to signal to other
• 10:13
  people like don't worry, I am down with
• 10:18
  hating on this stuff. And I think that's
• 10:20
  fine. I not an AI fan. But I do find the
• 10:24
  the use of these sorts of like frequent
• 10:26
  uh uh uh the frequent use of these words
• 10:29
  and the way that they pop up in a way
• 10:31
  that feels exclusively to me to just say
• 10:34
  like I'm in the know and what I know is
• 10:37
  that AI is bad. I'm in the know. And
• 10:39
  what I know, everyone's tired of these
• 10:41
  live service uh character shooters, hero
• 10:44
  shooters. You know,
• 10:45
  >> one of my favorite um uh pieces of work
• 10:50
  that I reference a lot on this show,
• 10:51
  you've heard me say Pierre Bordeaux, uh
• 10:53
  distinction. Uh he says that taste is a
• 10:55
  social weapon. Disliking the correct
• 10:58
  thing is how you signal cultural
• 11:00
  competence. Yes. And there is this this
• 11:02
  this like you know long writtenout idea
• 11:05
  where communities stabilize themselves
• 11:08
  by uh displacing tension onto a shared
• 11:12
  object. It's how you know I'm on this
• 11:14
  side and they're on that side. So, it's
• 11:15
  this it's like this funny thing that I
• 11:17
  feel like I see so clearly where it's
• 11:19
  like we have to espouse this idea that
• 11:22
  all live service games are bad and
• 11:24
  they're all bad in the same way just so
• 11:26
  that we can all pretend that we're on
• 11:28
  like the the other side of this line in
• 11:31
  the sand which is like such a goofy
• 11:33
  thing because I think like there can be
• 11:35
  good live service games and there can be
• 11:37
  a good implementation of live service
• 11:39
  and all that I'm really seeing kind of
• 11:41
  my my bullet point big picture put this
• 11:43
  on the billboard take with all of the
• 11:45
  conversation around Highguard, the
• 11:46
  people dunking on it, the people that
• 11:48
  are getting mad about the dunking on it.
• 11:50
  Um, both sides, it is an extremely
• 11:54
  uncritical, lazy, boring conversation
• 11:57
  that isn't really much about anything.
• 11:59
  That is what I am seeing because it's
• 12:01
  not just that we don't really have a
• 12:03
  game to judge because I think it's
• 12:05
  perfectly valid to judge trailers and to
• 12:08
  judge commercials and to judge PR and
• 12:10
  anybody anybody saying this that's like
• 12:13
  you can't judge the game because it's
• 12:14
  not out yet get lost. These are
• 12:17
  materials made for us to judge the thing
• 12:19
  in advance. Like that is the entire
• 12:22
  point of this.
• 12:23
  >> People like to say this idea of like oh
• 12:24
  you can't judge a game if you haven't
• 12:26
  played it. And what I think like the
• 12:28
  kernel of that idea is like you can't
• 12:29
  have like a nuanced like legit opinion
• 12:31
  about a video game or really anything if
• 12:34
  you haven't experienced it. And that's
• 12:35
  true. But I can say that I didn't play
• 12:37
  it because I thought it looked bad.
• 12:40
  >> I can say that. Do you know what I mean?
• 12:41
  And I like I I think that's totally
• 12:43
  fair. And and this idea that you have to
• 12:46
  play something to have any sort of
• 12:48
  opinion on it um I find to be really
• 12:50
  shortsighted and and uh misguided. And
• 12:54
  people only deploy that excuse when they
• 12:56
  are trying to defend against negative
• 12:58
  what they perceive as negative
• 12:59
  criticism. There's never like, "Oh, this
• 13:01
  looks good. I'm interested in this." And
• 13:02
  it's like, "Well, you haven't played it,
• 13:04
  dog, so slow down." Like that never that
• 13:07
  never shows up. Correct. And it's kind
• 13:09
  of this funny thing, right, where I'm
• 13:10
  not super familiar with this community,
• 13:12
  so apologies if I'm if I'm distorting
• 13:14
  how this actually functions, but I know
• 13:17
  in our um in our game of the year
• 13:19
  episode, we had Barrett Courtney on this
• 13:21
  show. And I know that the the kind of
• 13:23
  funny audience, they refer to their fans
• 13:24
  as like the kind of funny best friends.
• 13:26
  Oh, sure. And could you imagine if it's
• 13:28
  like
• 13:29
  >> the only way to be a best friend is
• 13:31
  never to react negatively to anything?
• 13:34
  like that's not what they're asking for
• 13:36
  because my best friends are
• 13:38
  confrontational. My best friends are
• 13:39
  checking each other. My best friends are
• 13:41
  giving each other constructive feedback.
• 13:43
  That is how we grow. And that's that's
• 13:44
  the expectation of being a friend. And I
• 13:47
  think the expectation of being a critic
• 13:50
  or being just like critically engaged in
• 13:53
  literally anything isn't just like how
• 13:57
  can I be how can I do a spin on this to
• 13:59
  be positive about it all of the time.
• 14:01
  That's toxic. Well, and also I think
• 14:04
  that u and maybe this is sort of the
• 14:07
  reaction to this IGN piece has been has
• 14:09
  been uh I think from what I have seen
• 14:11
  profoundly negative. I think that that's
• 14:12
  where this sort of thing starts to come
• 14:14
  into play where like
• 14:16
  >> basically the the thrust of this piece
• 14:18
  and and like we're not here to like dunk
• 14:20
  on this. No
• 14:21
  >> or anything like that. But it like the
• 14:23
  thrust of this piece is basically just
• 14:24
  like well I think this looks fun. Then
• 14:27
  it's like great. But it's also it's odd
• 14:30
  that
• 14:32
  to me it's a little odd that that needs
• 14:33
  to be said because there is a certain
• 14:35
  level of like well if you think it looks
• 14:36
  fun it's gonna be it's free to play
• 14:37
  it'll be out on Monday like you're good
• 14:39
  friend you know in the same way that
• 14:41
  like I do like like people who are
• 14:44
  feeling negative about it will play it
• 14:45
  and they'll either like it or they won't
• 14:47
  then they'll move on. Um,
• 14:49
  I I don't know. But it's odd to have
• 14:53
  what you're saying, the flip of that,
• 14:56
  the the idea of just like, oh, but we
• 14:58
  are just we just need to be excited and
• 14:59
  and all of that regardless of the
• 15:02
  context, because the context is
• 15:04
  important, and it is that, hey, this
• 15:06
  game is coming out on Monday. It's
• 15:07
  supposed to be this big uh uh
• 15:09
  free-to-play shooter game that is got
• 15:13
  the seal of approval, the one More Thing
• 15:15
  seal of approval from the Game Awards.
• 15:18
  And there's nothing to show for it right
• 15:21
  now. So, that is a little fishy, right?
• 15:23
  That is a little odd. Not fishy is the
• 15:24
  wrong word, that makes it sound like
• 15:25
  suspicious, but that's that is unusual,
• 15:29
  wouldn't you say? And I feel like these
• 15:31
  sorts of takes are are not necessarily
• 15:33
  like weighing that properly either.
• 15:36
  Sometimes I think people will identify a
• 15:39
  problem and then um maybe like not take
• 15:42
  their own advice in solving the problem
• 15:45
  because if this piece is making the
• 15:47
  argument and it largely is that there is
• 15:49
  this um performative hatred happening of
• 15:53
  Highguard
• 15:54
  >> which I do think is probably legit.
• 15:56
  >> I agree. Um allow me to quote the piece
• 15:59
  directly.
• 15:59
  >> Yeah.
• 16:00
  >> I realize I'm largely swimming against
• 16:02
  the tide of minds that have been made up
• 16:03
  here. We all know that on the internet
• 16:07
  in 2026, it's much easier to tear
• 16:09
  something down than reinforce it with
• 16:11
  optimism. Period. I'm gonna keep
• 16:13
  greeting, but I just want to have a
• 16:14
  little note here. I think something
• 16:15
  something's happening here
• 16:17
  >> where this piece is committing the exact
• 16:20
  same sin that it is accusing other
• 16:22
  people of doing, but instead of its
• 16:24
  target being Highg Guard, the game, the
• 16:26
  the target is people talking about
• 16:27
  Highguard. This is not an article as
• 16:30
  stoalling the positive qualities of
• 16:32
  Highguard. This is not a critical look
• 16:34
  at that trailer. This is not any reason
• 16:35
  to be excited about this game. This is
• 16:38
  simply a kind of uh wishy-washy,
• 16:41
  negatively framed accusation that
• 16:44
  everybody negatively talking about
• 16:46
  Highguard is some kind of phony. Allow
• 16:48
  me to continue. But I can't help but
• 16:50
  feel that many of the same people
• 16:51
  gleefully rubbing their hands together
• 16:54
  at what looks like another underwhelming
• 16:56
  game in their eyes will be the same
• 16:58
  bemoning the fact that the games
• 17:01
  industry is in a difficult spot where
• 17:03
  layoffs and studio closures seemingly
• 17:06
  happen on a weekly basis putting the
• 17:09
  creatives they admire out of work. Um
• 17:16
  I if I may Mhm. I think the
• 17:21
  there is there are a few
• 17:24
  problems I have with the way some of
• 17:26
  this is being discussed. If you put high
• 17:28
  guard into YouTube, you will find a
• 17:30
  bunch of videos
• 17:33
  um
• 17:35
  there there are a lot of videos talking
• 17:37
  about like hey this thing looks is this
• 17:39
  game cooked? Is this game cooked? And I
• 17:42
  have not watched a lot many of these at
• 17:44
  all. Right. That said, I am familiar
• 17:46
  with some of the creators who are making
• 17:48
  these.
• 17:48
  >> Sure.
• 17:49
  >> And um the ones that I recognize tend to
• 17:53
  be looking at uh uh video games from a
• 17:58
  uh shitty perspective maybe. You know
• 18:00
  what I mean? They're the same people who
• 18:01
  are like the woke question mark on a
• 18:03
  thumbnail, whatever, right? Like uh and
• 18:06
  I don't really have any interest in what
• 18:09
  their opinion is on this video game. And
• 18:11
  I think their p I think talking about
• 18:14
  that and talking about um the idea that
• 18:17
  people aren't going to play a game
• 18:18
  because it doesn't look very good or was
• 18:20
  not marketed properly and that being a
• 18:22
  failure of the gaming community to
• 18:24
  support developers and artists and all
• 18:26
  that sort of stuff. I think those are
• 18:27
  different conversations, right? a
• 18:29
  conversation about the way that like um
• 18:32
  uh hatred and bigotry and all this sort
• 18:34
  of stuff gives people money to live on
• 18:38
  to to to make YouTube channels or or
• 18:40
  build careers off of being like kind of
• 18:42
  shitty. Like that's a conversation,
• 18:44
  right? And and the way that like video
• 18:45
  games have been used to sort of like uh
• 18:48
  have been hijacked in order to sort of
• 18:50
  fund that and and fuel that, that's a
• 18:52
  conversation. But then there's a whole
• 18:53
  other conversation over here about the
• 18:55
  idea of sustainability in the in the
• 18:56
  industry and whatever. Um, and and the
• 18:59
  idea that like, hey, bad press can mean
• 19:01
  that people get laid off, whatever. Uh,
• 19:03
  or not bad press, but like bad
• 19:04
  marketing, whatever. But those, in my
• 19:06
  opinion, are two different
• 19:06
  conversations. And I feel like not
• 19:08
  distinguishing between those two things
• 19:10
  is um
• 19:14
  just to me it shows that this this is
• 19:16
  not particularly well thought. Well, and
• 19:18
  I just don't like I just don't like this
• 19:19
  this moral imperative that is being laid
• 19:21
  at the feet of the reader, which is like
• 19:23
  you have a responsibility to be generous
• 19:26
  to the promotion of this video game
• 19:29
  because otherwise you could be
• 19:31
  responsible for the studio closures and
• 19:34
  the layoffs. I find that to be insane.
• 19:36
  And frankly,
• 19:36
  >> yeah, I didn't [ __ ] do that.
• 19:38
  >> I didn't do that. And and if you didn't
• 19:39
  market your game properly to make me
• 19:41
  want to play your game or if it's it's a
• 19:42
  game that just wasn't very fun or
• 19:43
  whatever, that's not on me, everyone. We
• 19:45
  all know that. And I don't think there's
• 19:46
  a way to argue that. I think that's very
• 19:49
  silly.
• 19:49
  >> Of course. And I and I think I want to
• 19:51
  just get ahead of I think what might be
• 19:52
  a common error in interrogating this
• 19:56
  piece. And I've I've already seen a lot
• 19:58
  of people kind of like posting about it
• 19:59
  online. And I will say that I frankly do
• 20:02
  not care how correct or incorrect the
• 20:04
  writer is in their assertions. I am
• 20:06
  simply right now uh being critical of
• 20:09
  the writing. And I think that the
• 20:11
  writing I think elevating optimism into
• 20:14
  a moral stance uh charging criticism
• 20:17
  with and and correlating criticism with
• 20:19
  social harm is uh just like rhetorical
• 20:23
  guilt by association. This is this like
• 20:25
  this like moral leverage without any
• 20:27
  evidence is crazy. And I think that the
• 20:29
  position that the article assumes is
• 20:31
  that the reader you're not trying to
• 20:32
  inform the reader. You were trying to
• 20:34
  make the reader feel shame and
• 20:35
  complicit. And that's not even that's
• 20:37
  just not analysis. And I don't I I have
• 20:40
  no patience for it. So I I I Yeah,
• 20:41
  >> it's the same sort of thing where like
• 20:43
  when people talk about like how if a
• 20:45
  game scores poorly, unfortunately that
• 20:48
  that frequently leads to like layoffs
• 20:49
  and whatever at that studio, right? Um
• 20:52
  and there is like a question that like
• 20:55
  pops up every now and then about like
• 20:56
  well should a reviewer keep that in mind
• 20:59
  when reviewing a game? And the answer is
• 21:02
  um no. I don't have [ __ ] anything to
• 21:05
  do with what's going on at your studio
• 21:07
  and the ways that the financial
• 21:09
  executives uh uh plan things out and
• 21:11
  take care of the studio. And so, no, uh
• 21:14
  I I don't think about that at all and I
• 21:16
  shouldn't think about that all at all
• 21:17
  because that is not my job. I don't work
• 21:19
  at that studio. Um and so in a similar
• 21:21
  way, it feels like this is saying like,
• 21:23
  well, hey, and if you don't play this,
• 21:24
  you really want all those people to lose
• 21:26
  their jobs and it's like I'm not even
• 21:28
  involved with that. Well, and and I
• 21:30
  think there's almost if you're going to
• 21:31
  write about this thing, there is almost
• 21:33
  a responsibility to perform some kind of
• 21:36
  analysis that at least frames like
• 21:38
  what's going on in a from from like a
• 21:41
  logical point of view because the fact
• 21:43
  of the matter is I'm sorry like you
• 21:44
  don't want people judging games before
• 21:45
  they're out, but people can like read
• 21:47
  marketing signals and we do this all the
• 21:49
  time. We can evaluate as consumers
• 21:51
  ourselves genre saturation. We can
• 21:54
  notice aesthetic trends just based off
• 21:57
  of trailers. We can react to publisher
• 22:00
  strategy. These are not like this
• 22:02
  doesn't mean I'm issuing a final verdict
• 22:04
  on this video game. This doesn't mean
• 22:06
  I'm reviewing the video game, but I am I
• 22:09
  am reacting to something. And you can
• 22:12
  you can interrogate that without
• 22:14
  creating like this straw man of
• 22:16
  criticism over like this this this like
• 22:18
  the the least common denominator dumb
• 22:20
  person which does exist that is like
• 22:22
  making a personal enemy out of high
• 22:24
  guard. But like in this like listen in
• 22:26
  my version of this piece I would have
• 22:27
  liked some kind of analysis of live
• 22:30
  service fatigue. I would have liked an
• 22:31
  analysis of like the maybe how Concord
• 22:34
  was marketed and making a comparison
• 22:36
  there. Maybe talk about the overupp of
• 22:39
  um this this games in this particular
• 22:42
  genre or just even from bare minimum
• 22:46
  dude bare minimum.
• 22:48
  Did this game in its reveal trailer not
• 22:51
  have a thing that was more fun to talk
• 22:54
  about than
• 22:57
  kind of it's the distrust?
• 22:59
  >> You know what I mean? This is I mean we
• 23:00
  talked about this what at the end of
• 23:02
  last year this idea of like hey actually
• 23:04
  the interesting thing about Highguard is
• 23:06
  that there's been no news about
• 23:07
  Highguard and and like that's because
• 23:10
  that trailer which I remember like
• 23:13
  looked fine. It looked like a game I
• 23:15
  won't play. You know that's just me
• 23:17
  being honest. Who knows? Maybe it comes
• 23:18
  out. It's awesome. It's free to play.
• 23:20
  Maybe I'll download it. But like um
• 23:24
  so to to me the interesting story here
• 23:26
  is wait a second. Where's this game?
• 23:29
  Where did this game go? This this was
• 23:31
  this was the one more thing from the
• 23:33
  game awards. Not that is not a a
• 23:37
  slot that they just give out to anyone.
• 23:39
  You know,
• 23:40
  >> to quote the piece again, uh again, I am
• 23:42
  by no means convinced that either of
• 23:44
  these games, speaking to um Highguard
• 23:47
  and Marathon, will be blockbuster hits
• 23:49
  nor guarantee that they'll be amazing
• 23:51
  shooters in their own right. But I at
• 23:52
  least want to give them a chance because
• 23:54
  if we are not getting excited about
• 23:56
  games, what are we even doing here?
• 24:02
  >> What indeed friend? Um there is there is
• 24:05
  excitement in criticism. There is
• 24:07
  excitement in in there is like criticism
• 24:11
  is an act of love and even that doesn't
• 24:14
  mean it has to be.
• 24:15
  >> Can I ask so when you so
• 24:18
  >> I don't write like reviews really
• 24:21
  anymore you know what I mean in terms of
• 24:23
  like getting a game sitting down for a
• 24:24
  publication writing a review and giving
• 24:27
  it a score. You have more recently more
• 24:29
  recently than I have with your Kirby
• 24:30
  Airr Writers review at Kotaku. Um, but
• 24:34
  like I don't write traditional reviews
• 24:36
  in that style anymore. That said, I do
• 24:38
  write I feel like reviews. I I think
• 24:40
  like my some of my YouTube videos I
• 24:42
  think I could call reviews. Like I think
• 24:43
  my Ghost of Yote video is a review um of
• 24:46
  that game because I'm I'm speaking to it
• 24:48
  is from a perspective of like the
• 24:49
  storytelling and the narrative and
• 24:50
  whatever. Um, but that is my review of
• 24:52
  Ghost of Yote for all intents and
• 24:54
  purposes. when you are sitting down like
• 24:55
  with a game that you are going to be
• 24:57
  reviewing in whatever format that takes,
• 25:00
  does excitement ever really play into it
• 25:02
  for you?
• 25:04
  >> Whoa, what a question.
• 25:06
  >> Because I'm thinking about like what's
• 25:07
  the next game that I want to like do a
• 25:10
  review for? And I was like, oh man, it
• 25:13
  would be cool if I could do something
• 25:14
  with Resident Evil 9, a series that I
• 25:17
  love. And then I'm like, that is a game
• 25:19
  that I'm excited for. But when I sit
• 25:21
  down with it to actually play it and try
• 25:23
  to come up with um find my perspective
• 25:26
  on it and and then sit down to write
• 25:29
  about it and work on a video about it
• 25:30
  and everything, am I excited to do that
• 25:35
  work or is that when the excitement sort
• 25:37
  of ends and now I'm in like, okay, it's
• 25:39
  it's time to like an like analyze and
• 25:41
  it's time to really like do the mental
• 25:43
  thinking and and whatever for this game.
• 25:47
  Man, this is interesting, right? Because
• 25:49
  Yeah. I I think that I think just
• 25:50
  speaking for myself. Yeah. It's like I'm
• 25:52
  trying to think like what is a game that
• 25:54
  like you just said like oh my god I'd be
• 25:56
  really excited to review this and then
• 25:57
  like what does that turn into once I
• 25:59
  actually have the game? I think once I
• 26:02
  have the game that experience is like
• 26:04
  that's like man I guess I guess I know
• 26:08
  for sure that this is true because how
• 26:10
  many games did I sit down to play so
• 26:11
  excited last year and then just
• 26:13
  completely go oh I hate this now
• 26:15
  >> dude that I mean we were talking about
• 26:17
  ghost. That was me. I was like I was
• 26:19
  like here we go. Time to time to play
• 26:21
  it. Like after like two sessions I was
• 26:23
  like but I thought this was gonna be
• 26:24
  good.
• 26:25
  >> It's bad. It's actually really bad
• 26:27
  everyone. It's bad.
• 26:29
  >> Um
• 26:29
  >> oh man.
• 26:30
  >> But yeah I for me I think like the
• 26:32
  excitement quote unquote like and like
• 26:35
  it cuts off as soon as I have it in my
• 26:37
  hands cuz the excitement is the
• 26:38
  anticipation whatever and then now it's
• 26:39
  time to like sit down. It's time to be
• 26:40
  at work. And that's not to say that I
• 26:42
  can't enjoy it, right? Because I I think
• 26:46
  we should let these things take us how
• 26:49
  they do. And like that's part of the
• 26:51
  work, right? Did you enjoy it? What did
• 26:53
  you enjoy? What did you find interesting
• 26:55
  about it? I'm excited for Resident Evil
• 26:57
  9. If I had to guess, I'm going to like
• 26:58
  it based on the things that I like about
• 27:00
  Resident Evil that seem to be in this
• 27:02
  game. But I'm also not going to let my
• 27:05
  excitement and interest in this series
• 27:07
  or I'm going to try to not let it sort
• 27:10
  of cloud my judgment for what I want to
• 27:12
  talk about when I eventually play it.
• 27:14
  And I'm going to try and take the game
• 27:15
  for what it is and not for what I was
• 27:17
  expecting it to be.
• 27:19
  >> Yeah. And that's funny, too, because I
• 27:20
  think something you're identifying for
• 27:22
  me at least is that the excitement for a
• 27:24
  game is the is the excitement of like
• 27:28
  waiting for it. It's like a completely
• 27:30
  different thing. Like it has
• 27:31
  >> Yeah. Yeah. And it it like I can be
• 27:35
  excited for games and and enjoy being
• 27:38
  excited for them and then ultimately not
• 27:40
  like the game and that doesn't mean I
• 27:41
  didn't have fun being excited for it.
• 27:43
  >> Yeah. 100%.
• 27:44
  >> Yeah. Yeah.
• 27:45
  >> Like and and here's here's this I I I
• 27:49
  kind of maybe want to move away from
• 27:50
  talking about this piece because I'm
• 27:51
  just not trying to like dunk on this
• 27:52
  person who I don't know. Um but you know
• 27:56
  talking about the idea of like and if we
• 27:57
  can't be excited about video games then
• 27:58
  like what are we even doing here? Um,
• 28:00
  like you can be excited about games, you
• 28:02
  know what I mean? Like like certainly be
• 28:03
  excited about this and it's seems like
• 28:05
  you probably are excited for
• 28:07
  >> Peter. But Peter, he's not like But
• 28:09
  that's the thing. That's I think my big
• 28:10
  problem with with this piece is that he
• 28:13
  admits that we have no info on the
• 28:15
  mechanics or or character breakdowns or
• 28:17
  even like clarity on the genre and that
• 28:19
  there hasn't been any content post
• 28:20
  reveal and then is like, "Okay, so we
• 28:22
  don't have any information, but also
• 28:23
  people should not be skeptical of this
• 28:25
  game."
• 28:26
  >> Yeah, it's weird.
• 28:27
  >> I I just Yeah, it's like so hard, man.
• 28:29
  It's like such a hard position for me to
• 28:31
  defend. And that's why I'm I'm not even
• 28:32
  saying that like they're necessarily
• 28:34
  wrong. I'm saying that this piece has
• 28:37
  flaws. This this piece as a work as a
• 28:39
  work undo itself is flawed because it is
• 28:42
  it is not to me making a clear or
• 28:45
  compelling argument that's like really
• 28:46
  grounded in anything that I have to like
• 28:49
  that I have to really interrogate. It's
• 28:50
  just kind of like making a plea.
• 28:52
  >> Yeah, I think that's fair. And I think
• 28:54
  that's fair. And and it's interesting
• 28:55
  too that it brings up Marathon which I
• 28:57
  think is is an interesting sort of um
• 29:00
  like sister game to Highguard in this in
• 29:03
  this sort of regard where like Marathon
• 29:05
  is a game that when they revealed it
• 29:08
  sort of like the the reveal from last
• 29:10
  year cuz they had revealed it what like
• 29:12
  2022 or something like that. But when
• 29:14
  they said like this is what Marathon is,
• 29:16
  this is what the game looks like you
• 29:17
  know uh uh it's going to be this hero
• 29:19
  shooter extraction shooter thing.
• 29:21
  everyone also sort of pounced on it, you
• 29:23
  know, and it was like not looking good
• 29:24
  for uh for Marathon. Then those uh beta
• 29:27
  tests came out and people were kind of
• 29:28
  mixed on it, but it's like not looking
• 29:30
  good for Marathon and and I wonder like
• 29:33
  how much of that is legitimate like
• 29:36
  feedback on from people who have like
• 29:39
  played the game and how much of it is
• 29:41
  just the people who are sort of leading
• 29:43
  the gaming cultural community to say,
• 29:46
  "Hey, Marathon, not a game we're going
• 29:49
  to play."
• 29:49
  >> Dude, people want a story. so bad. They
• 29:51
  want a story. They want to be in the
• 29:52
  inroup and they want the narrative. And
• 29:54
  people are unwilling to interrogate the
• 29:56
  degree to which those narratives are
• 29:58
  able to actually transform their
• 30:00
  experience playing a game. I cannot help
• 30:03
  myself. I'm going to bring this up a
• 30:04
  lot, but the review period for the game
• 30:08
  Animal Well, how much did that affect
• 30:12
  people's genuine experiences with that
• 30:15
  game? Um, Peter, you of course know what
• 30:16
  I'm referring to.
• 30:17
  >> I was there, brother.
• 30:18
  >> Yeah. I know. which is why it
• 30:21
  >> which is why I wasn't but I was I was I
• 30:23
  was uh got working with somebody that
• 30:24
  was and um but the idea that there was
• 30:28
  this um inner circle Discord server full
• 30:32
  of the reviewers playing the game a game
• 30:33
  about secrets a game about figuring
• 30:35
  things out and it's like oh my god
• 30:37
  there's an experience here and that is
• 30:40
  separate from the game but it is also
• 30:42
  now tangled with the game and tangled
• 30:43
  with your impressions and now outside of
• 30:46
  that moment when we talk about animal
• 30:48
  well we are representing it with that
• 30:50
  experience in mind and that is something
• 30:51
  that you were fooled by the publisher
• 30:53
  into doing. I'm sorry. That doesn't mean
• 30:54
  it's not true, but that's it was a
• 30:56
  strategy.
• 30:56
  >> I think I had a remarkable time playing
• 31:00
  Animal Well, because I got to play it
• 31:01
  pre pre-release with what you said a
• 31:04
  Discord server full of people who were
• 31:07
  all playing the game. Uh, and we were
• 31:09
  all trying to figure it out together
• 31:10
  because it is a game about uh
• 31:12
  information. It's one of those games
• 31:14
  where like you remember like Tunic that
• 31:15
  game where you're a little fox and like
• 31:17
  that's a game where you can do all of
• 31:19
  the things you want to do. You just
• 31:21
  don't know how to do them yet. So like
• 31:23
  fast travel for example is in Animal
• 31:25
  Well and you have access to it like
• 31:26
  really really quick in my memory but you
• 31:29
  just need to have the information for
• 31:30
  what for how to do it. And um
• 31:35
  it was an incredible experience that is
• 31:37
  impossible to replicate. impossible to
• 31:39
  replicate because because we were
• 31:41
  playing a game we were completely in the
• 31:42
  dark and there were there was no wiki
• 31:43
  for you know what I mean? There was no
• 31:44
  guides written for. It was literally
• 31:46
  just like us trying to figure all of
• 31:48
  this out and having like a lot of fun
• 31:50
  because it is a really fun sort of
• 31:52
  puzzle mystery game. But the conditions
• 31:55
  in which that was played are un you
• 31:58
  cannot replicate them.
• 31:59
  >> And I'm not saying that that makes that
• 32:00
  experience less true. What I'm saying
• 32:03
  that proves is that there is no single
• 32:06
  authoritative meaning with anything. And
• 32:09
  people in games, this ties into a lot of
• 32:10
  what we talked about in our episode last
• 32:12
  week, they love to act like there is one
• 32:16
  clean resolution that everybody should
• 32:18
  walk away with. Um, another game that I
• 32:20
  wanted to bring into this conversation
• 32:22
  was the reveal of the new Life is
• 32:25
  Strange game, Life is Strange Union. Um,
• 32:28
  so this game got its reveal trailer and
• 32:31
  it one of the things it demonstrated was
• 32:33
  that Chloe, the character from the first
• 32:36
  game, kind of the is it fair to say love
• 32:39
  interest?
• 32:40
  >> I'm going to be honest with you, Life is
• 32:41
  Strange is I'm allergic to. I [ __ ]
• 32:44
  hate these games. I can't I could not
• 32:46
  like these games any less.
• 32:48
  >> Um, so I
• 32:50
  >> I like them. They speak to me. They
• 32:51
  speak to me.
• 32:51
  >> I have no idea. I I've seen a lot of
• 32:53
  people have a lot of feelings about
• 32:55
  whatever character was revealed as if
• 32:56
  they were an Avenger in this trailer,
• 32:58
  and I was like, I don't I don't know,
• 32:59
  man.
• 33:00
  >> Okay, so like full spoilers for the
• 33:02
  first Life is Strange game that came out
• 33:05
  >> 2011. Okay, great, great, great, great.
• 33:07
  Um, yeah, so at the end of this game,
• 33:10
  it's it's, you know, it's one of these
• 33:11
  games where you got to make decisions,
• 33:12
  right? And it's like, oh my god, am I
• 33:14
  going to save the city or am I going to
• 33:16
  save my girl? Like, that's that's the
• 33:18
  decision that it essentially comes down
• 33:20
  to at the end. And I think the uh people
• 33:23
  kind of recognize that the
• 33:26
  kind of canon decision, even though
• 33:28
  that's not necessarily the case, was um
• 33:31
  choosing the town over this girl and
• 33:34
  that this girl was effectively dead. Um
• 33:37
  because of the new game doing this thing
• 33:39
  with like alternate timelines and going
• 33:41
  between them and now that the these
• 33:43
  timelines coming together, it appears
• 33:45
  that this person is back. And the
• 33:48
  narrative that emerged was singular with
• 33:51
  the reveal of this game. You could not
• 33:54
  talk about anything anything other than
• 33:57
  what it meant that they had chosen to
• 34:00
  revive this character Chloe and how that
• 34:02
  that was an act of desperation on the
• 34:05
  part of the game makers. And it is one
• 34:07
  that quote unquote maybe even ruins the
• 34:10
  ending of the first game. Um, so I have
• 34:15
  a lot of thoughts about this. I have a
• 34:17
  lot of thoughts about this.
• 34:18
  >> I do too.
• 34:18
  >> And I think straight from the dome, I
• 34:21
  just want to say Life is Strange, the
• 34:23
  first game that exists as a as a
• 34:25
  finished text. Okay. And people just
• 34:28
  like lie to themselves and they think
• 34:29
  that canon and fiction and all this
• 34:31
  stuff is real. And if anything happens
• 34:33
  in Life is Strange 12, 13, 14 has an
• 34:36
  effect on Life is Strange 1. It's just
• 34:38
  not true. If you go back and you play
• 34:39
  Life is Strange 1, it's going to be the
• 34:41
  same goddamn game. It's gonna be I don't
• 34:43
  care what the creators or anybody with
• 34:45
  the property does to any future
• 34:47
  iteration of the game. You can't ruin
• 34:49
  the first game. That's not how anything
• 34:50
  works.
• 34:51
  >> Cuz I also think too like so
• 34:55
  >> yes your experience with that 100%. Is
• 34:59
  gets to be isolated in that game and
• 35:02
  then your experience with the second one
• 35:05
  your experience with the second one does
• 35:06
  get to be built on your experience with
• 35:09
  the first one. But those can be separate
• 35:11
  like like they can be separate sort of
• 35:12
  experiences that you engage with. Do you
• 35:15
  know you understand what I'm saying?
• 35:16
  Where it's like
• 35:17
  >> 100% 100%. And I think the thing that
• 35:19
  bothers me the most is that when I look
• 35:21
  at the reaction to this, it's not that
• 35:23
  the reaction to I'm not out here writing
• 35:25
  can we all stop dunking on Life is
• 35:28
  Strange Reunion, please question mark. I
• 35:31
  am saying is there I I would like to
• 35:34
  know is there any version of Life is
• 35:37
  Strange Reunion where we bring Khloe
• 35:39
  back and it's good. Is that possible?
• 35:42
  Because the way that it has been
• 35:43
  represented to me is that them bringing
• 35:46
  Khloe back is a sign of weakness and it
• 35:49
  can only be bad because the smart
• 35:51
  position is to say these game makers are
• 35:55
  hacky, dumb, whatever because they are
• 35:59
  doing this cheap thing. But surely
• 36:02
  surely there is a there is a version of
• 36:04
  this story where this character comes
• 36:05
  back and it is a good story in its own
• 36:08
  right separate from whatever you think
• 36:10
  about the first Life is Strange game.
• 36:12
  Surely there is a story in this game
• 36:14
  that can be good on its own. Even if
• 36:17
  it's making that choice, right?
• 36:19
  >> You would hope so. I as a Life is
• 36:21
  Strange hater would disagree and say
• 36:22
  impossible. They can't make a good
• 36:24
  story. But I understand I Yes, I'm being
• 36:27
  facitious. I do understand what you
• 36:29
  mean. That said, I would
• 36:32
  based on the marketing blurbs that I
• 36:35
  have read about this, I'm I'm
• 36:37
  >> Okay, now I want to talk about this too
• 36:38
  because I think
• 36:39
  >> currently looking at um the press
• 36:42
  release uh on Xbox Wire. This was
• 36:44
  written by Andrew James, senior brand
• 36:46
  manager for Life is Strange.
• 36:47
  >> Oh god, this guy really took an L on
• 36:49
  this.
• 36:50
  >> This is rough. This is rough. You broken
• 36:52
  into some marketing points about like
• 36:54
  what's going on with Max, Chloe, and the
• 36:57
  whole crew. Um, the first subhead in on
• 37:01
  this press release is giving Max and
• 37:04
  Chloe the ENDING THEY DESERVE.
• 37:05
  >> NO.
• 37:07
  >> WHICH IS SILLY because
• 37:09
  I mean like it's silly and because
• 37:12
  >> giving them the ending they deserve.
• 37:13
  [ __ ] you made the game the
• 37:15
  ending they deserve. That's you're a
• 37:17
  video game.
• 37:18
  >> But can I say that this this is proof
• 37:20
  that marketing works on people. Because
• 37:22
  when people say marketing works on you,
• 37:24
  they're like, "Oh, it's a commercial
• 37:25
  that convinced me to buy something that
• 37:27
  I actually didn't want." No, no, no.
• 37:29
  This is bad marketing and it is
• 37:31
  convincing you that the game is bad.
• 37:33
  This has nothing to do with the game.
• 37:35
  This is just a marketing person writing
• 37:36
  off some garbage that they think you
• 37:38
  want to hear, but people think that that
• 37:40
  this is a reflection of the game, and
• 37:42
  it's not. It's not. It worked on you. It
• 37:44
  made you think that this was what you
• 37:46
  had to discuss, that this was the only
• 37:48
  topic that you could talk about, was
• 37:50
  what the marketing said was the thing
• 37:52
  you should focus on. And it worked on
• 37:54
  everybody. They set the table and they
• 37:56
  got all of this buzz. It wasn't good,
• 37:58
  >> but it worked.
• 38:00
  >> That's true. I mean, that that is true.
• 38:01
  But to your point though, I think I
• 38:03
  think if that and here's the thing, this
• 38:05
  is a piece of marketing. This is not
• 38:08
  written by the people who made the game,
• 38:09
  right? But it is a part of the team. Um,
• 38:12
  and so I think that if that is the
• 38:13
  perspective that they are coming at this
• 38:15
  from, I would say I personally would, if
• 38:18
  I were going to play this game would be
• 38:19
  a little nervous that maybe the people
• 38:21
  making it. Um,
• 38:24
  if they are focus if their perspective
• 38:26
  is we got to give them the ending they
• 38:28
  deserve, then maybe uh the story is not
• 38:31
  going to be very good. But
• 38:32
  >> I I I agree with you. But I think the
• 38:34
  ending they deserve doesn't exist in
• 38:36
  fiction. I think that is a parasocial
• 38:38
  fan relationship. And so we're talking
• 38:41
  about something that doesn't even
• 38:42
  actually exist once you play the game.
• 38:44
  There is no way of measuring this this
• 38:48
  >> deserve. What does that mean?
• 38:49
  >> That's a completely insane thing. And
• 38:51
  anybody that's like, "Oh, well the the
• 38:54
  Khloe got the ending she deserved in the
• 38:56
  first game." Wrong. Dead wrong. Dead
• 38:59
  wrong. You can say that she got the
• 39:01
  ending that the story required, that the
• 39:03
  story called for, that the story wanted.
• 39:05
  But this is a different game and this is
• 39:07
  a different story. And you cannot tell
• 39:09
  me that you cannot deploy this same
• 39:11
  character in another story and give them
• 39:13
  a different ending that they deserve in
• 39:15
  this one. We do this all the time with
• 39:17
  fictional characters. All the time. Look
• 39:18
  at any superhero book. How many times
• 39:20
  has every single superhero died. It's
• 39:22
  like and then come back. And it's like
• 39:24
  the the different deaths are they
• 39:27
  require different things and they're
• 39:28
  doing different things in the story and
• 39:30
  they're telling different stories. And
• 39:31
  for you to be like so small-minded that
• 39:33
  you think Chloe is like a real person
• 39:35
  that we like
• 39:37
  >> let down that we let down as like a real
• 39:39
  human. Yeah.
• 39:40
  >> Truly like a relational figure that we
• 39:42
  must protect. Yes. Is like that is that
• 39:45
  is insane. And it's funny how like any
• 39:46
  narrative choice with this character
• 39:48
  that doesn't affirm the fans emotional
• 39:50
  bond with her is framed as a betrayal.
• 39:53
  >> Can I ask so what has been the what has
• 39:55
  been the reaction from fans
• 39:57
  >> with extremely no dude. Dude. Dude.
• 40:01
  Okay, let me tell you because this is
• 40:03
  charged. So, um, a Life is Strange game
• 40:06
  came out recently, two years ago. Double
• 40:08
  >> exposure.
• 40:09
  >> Mhm. And this they did a big swing by
• 40:12
  bringing back Max Coughfield. And there
• 40:14
  was some there was some drama because
• 40:16
  it's like the the people making the game
• 40:18
  aren't necessarily even the same people
• 40:19
  who made those original Life is Strange
• 40:21
  games. So,
• 40:22
  >> I don't mean to blow your [ __ ] mind,
• 40:23
  but that's every video game ever.
• 40:26
  >> Yeah. And and and I also um I also find
• 40:29
  this to be something that I don't
• 40:30
  particularly
• 40:32
  makes it makes no difference to me. I I
• 40:33
  think this this idea of like ownership
• 40:35
  of these characters, it's like again,
• 40:37
  you have Life is Strange. Like
• 40:39
  >> Yeah, it's there. It's there.
• 40:40
  >> It's there.
• 40:41
  >> It's good.
• 40:42
  >> It's okay.
• 40:42
  >> Yeah.
• 40:42
  >> It's okay. I'm I'm not out here going I
• 40:45
  do not accept anyone as Superman besides
• 40:48
  Henry Caval. Like
• 40:52
  >> it's it's odd. It would be odd. Yes, it
• 40:53
  would be odd. This is an odd Yes. This
• 40:55
  is odd. Okay, so um Double Exposure gets
• 40:58
  revealed and dude, dude, dude, I think
• 41:00
  that might have been a summer GamesFest
• 41:01
  reveal and I was there and I remember
• 41:03
  talking to everybody in the space and
• 41:04
  going, "Uh, they're bringing back Max
• 41:06
  Cawfield, so I don't know how I feel
• 41:08
  about that. I don't know. Her story was
• 41:10
  over." And I'm like, "Yeah, that story
• 41:13
  was over. This is a different one. Like,
• 41:16
  stop." So, I think people are just like
• 41:18
  so captured by their like closeness to
• 41:21
  these games. And more than anything, the
• 41:23
  reason why I want to bring this up in
• 41:25
  respect to Highguard and our earlier
• 41:27
  conversation is that I truly feel that
• 41:29
  people are like so attached to what they
• 41:32
  think is the correct talking point about
• 41:35
  a video game, what the real fans think,
• 41:37
  and then just rever reverberating that
• 41:40
  back like in this echo chamber. And I I
• 41:43
  I swear to God, man, it's like we even
• 41:45
  saw this with Borderlands 4 last year.
• 41:48
  Gosh.
• 41:48
  >> Where everyone decided, okay, this is
• 41:50
  what Borderlands 3 sucked. Reviews eight
• 41:54
  out of 10. N out of 10.
• 41:56
  >> Yeah. So, so it's just this thing where
• 41:58
  I I think like um more and more video
• 42:01
  games, less and less people being really
• 42:04
  like deeply incisive and critical about
• 42:06
  them. It is more important to have a
• 42:07
  shortorthhand and to be right. And um a
• 42:09
  lot of the times people in games media
• 42:11
  want to be seen as an expert on a
• 42:12
  franchise so that they can freelance and
• 42:14
  write about it so they can get jobs
• 42:16
  reviewing the games, previewing the
• 42:17
  games, whatever it is. And I think
• 42:18
  people are so so so so attached to just
• 42:21
  saying the thing that they think signals
• 42:24
  that they are in that they are on the
• 42:27
  inside and that they get it. So to
• 42:29
  answer your question, largely the
• 42:31
  response I have seen is that it is some
• 42:33
  kind of incredible injustice that the
• 42:36
  character Khloe could could appear in
• 42:38
  this video game at all. Is it also part
• 42:41
  of that thing that like Mass Effect 3
• 42:43
  ran into as well where it's like, well,
• 42:44
  I made all these choices and so what?
• 42:46
  They just don't matter.
• 42:51
  >> I've seen too much of that.
• 42:52
  >> Do you know what I mean? So you're
• 42:53
  saying that like you said she dies. Did
• 42:56
  she die either way in the first one?
• 42:58
  >> Um, it's been so long. I don't think so.
• 43:01
  I think I think the idea is if you
• 43:03
  choose her, I have it in my head is like
• 43:05
  you you drive off into the sunset and
• 43:08
  it's presumed that the entire town of
• 43:10
  everyone you've lived with up until that
• 43:12
  point dies instead due to a hurricane, I
• 43:14
  think.
• 43:15
  >> Got it. But she does die in one of the
• 43:16
  endings.
• 43:17
  >> That's correct. So, but so I think then
• 43:19
  that that by like
• 43:22
  uh bringing this character back, people
• 43:25
  are mad because it's like, well, I chose
• 43:27
  I did this thing where I chose that she
• 43:29
  >> Yes, she did. And she was dead for 10
• 43:31
  years. What do you want?
• 43:32
  >> Right.
• 43:34
  It's like,
• 43:35
  >> you little freak.
• 43:36
  >> She You played the game and she died.
• 43:38
  She died. And and I and I hate to tell
• 43:40
  you this, but like the I also don't like
• 43:42
  that response because this character now
• 43:45
  has years of being without this person
• 43:48
  and is reacting to their sudden
• 43:50
  intervention in this story. That's like
• 43:53
  part of the logic of the story that
• 43:55
  they're telling. And honestly, I'd be
• 43:57
  surprised if Khloe's makes it makes it
• 43:58
  through to the end of this thing. I
• 43:59
  think they got to put things right. I
• 44:01
  think they got You know what I mean,
• 44:02
  >> dude? They're giving Max and Khloe the
• 44:03
  ending they deserve.
• 44:05
  >> Dude,
• 44:05
  >> they get to be together finally. Oh my
• 44:08
  god. Yeah. But anyways, um you know,
• 44:11
  just a little a few bullet points here
• 44:13
  for anybody taking notes. Um the
• 44:15
  original game is unchanged. Your
• 44:17
  experience can never be retroactive.
• 44:21
  Your experience happens.
• 44:22
  >> That's like such a huge thing though
• 44:23
  that people like to talk about with um
• 44:26
  with like sequels or whatever, but it's
• 44:27
  like it's the idea of like, oh, it
• 44:29
  renders the the first one like worse.
• 44:31
  And like I understand, but also it
• 44:35
  doesn't. Like I understand I understand
• 44:37
  that like idea but like if you are
• 44:40
  trying to take it as a whole but like
• 44:43
  these are also individual works right
• 44:45
  and so like for me I'm not saying
• 44:47
  everyone has to view it this way but
• 44:49
  like this is how I usually view it. If
• 44:51
  like there is a disappointing sequel to
• 44:53
  a thing I just kind of don't think about
• 44:54
  it. Do you mean like I just go like oh
• 44:56
  that I don't like that. And and I think
• 44:59
  um to me this is in the exact same line
• 45:01
  of logic as people that read like that
• 45:03
  Neil Duckman interview where they're
• 45:04
  like, "Oh, they could have created the
• 45:07
  vaccine if they did whatever on." You
• 45:09
  know what I mean?
• 45:11
  >> This ruins the game for me. It's like
• 45:12
  that's user error. I'm sorry you did it
• 45:14
  to yourself.
• 45:15
  >> Like that's not the game. Um, I believe
• 45:18
  this was Neil Gaiman, so I apologize for
• 45:20
  even [ __ ] bringing him up, but um, I
• 45:23
  think someone asked him on Tumblr like
• 45:25
  in like 2013, which is a very old
• 45:28
  sentence, I think, at this point. Um,
• 45:30
  someone asked him like, uh, hey, what
• 45:33
  ends up happening to this character or
• 45:35
  whatever after the book ends? And he
• 45:37
  basically responded like, who cares? It
• 45:39
  doesn't matter because even if I told
• 45:41
  you that's actually not canon. That's
• 45:43
  not part of the text. What you are
• 45:45
  asking me to do is write like fanfiction
• 45:47
  of the highest degree because I'm the
• 45:49
  author. You know what I'm talking about?
• 45:51
  Have you read this? Is this new game?
• 45:53
  >> In a in a similar vein, critical
• 45:55
  critical error Nation member,
• 45:56
  patreon.com/critical error. Um Mitch
• 45:58
  Dyer and video game writer posted posted
• 46:01
  to me on Blue Sky. I will always think
• 46:02
  of Stephen King complaining about this
• 46:04
  fandom with his books. People telling
• 46:06
  him how his novels are ruined now by
• 46:08
  sequels or adaptation. And I and quote
• 46:11
  and I pull them off the shelf to check
• 46:13
  and nothing's changed.
• 46:16
  >> No, it's true. It's true. You wrote a
• 46:18
  book. You you played a game. That was
• 46:20
  your experience with the game. And it
• 46:21
  doesn't it doesn't lessen it or ruin it
• 46:23
  or anything like that. You know what I
• 46:24
  mean? Um
• 46:25
  >> Oh my god.
• 46:26
  >> Because I think a lot of this, to be
• 46:28
  completely honest with you, the more I
• 46:29
  think about this is that it it hits me
• 46:32
  how much of people in games media,
• 46:35
  people talking about games online, are
• 46:37
  also just like super fans. And I think a
• 46:39
  lot of this has to do with people in
• 46:41
  fandoms not wanting to renegotiate how
• 46:43
  things made them feel.
• 46:45
  >> And it's like, you know what I mean?
• 46:47
  >> So, I was listening to a podcast, um,
• 46:49
  the Nextlander Watch cast. Um, I like
• 46:52
  their stuff quite a bit. Um, this is
• 46:54
  their Nextlander. They they were like
• 46:56
  former Giant Bomb people. Um, and they
• 46:59
  have a a movie watch cast where they'll
• 47:01
  watch a movie and review and talk about
• 47:02
  it, whatever. And I was listening to
• 47:04
  their review of The Thing, uh, one of my
• 47:06
  favorite movies. and they were talking
• 47:08
  about the ending. Are you familiar with
• 47:09
  The Thing?
• 47:10
  >> Yeah.
• 47:10
  >> Yeah. So, if you're not if you've not
• 47:11
  seen The Thing, um it's basically Among
• 47:13
  Us. Um where it's like a monster has
• 47:17
  infected people in this like isolated uh
• 47:19
  area and it's like no one knows who
• 47:24
  is the thing and then is trying to kill
• 47:26
  people
• 47:26
  >> of you to say basically Among Us. An
• 47:29
  insane thing to say.
• 47:30
  >> It is. I know the audience. I know the a
• 47:33
  I know I've [ __ ] seen who listens to
• 47:35
  critical error. The gamers you are um
• 47:39
  >> vent vent.
• 47:41
  >> Yeah. Yeah. In the thing they're
• 47:43
  venting. They're venting.
• 47:44
  >> Yeah, you're right.
• 47:45
  >> Body found body found in electronics or
• 47:46
  whatever. I don't know. I It's been
• 47:49
  [ __ ] ever anyway. Um, at the end
• 47:51
  though, um, basically, uh, two of the
• 47:53
  characters end up sort of in the snow
• 47:55
  together and and it's unclear if one of
• 47:58
  them is the thing or not. And the movie
• 48:00
  ends very ambiguously and they were
• 48:02
  talking about like, "So, what do you
• 48:03
  think? Do you think he is the thing? Do
• 48:04
  you think he's not the thing? Whatever."
• 48:05
  And they were talking about this and one
• 48:07
  of them sort of mentioned like, "I
• 48:08
  looked up to see if John Carpenter, the
• 48:10
  director, had ever said anything about
• 48:11
  it." And every single time he basically
• 48:14
  says like, "That's the point. You don't
• 48:17
  know. The point is that it's a question
• 48:19
  and that's the whole point of the thing.
• 48:20
  And they were talking about it and I
• 48:21
  really like their perspective because
• 48:22
  they were just saying like it's just
• 48:24
  such a like joyless way to watch a movie
• 48:26
  and to experience like a piece of art of
• 48:28
  like I need to have the answer and
• 48:30
  that's something we talk about a lot on
• 48:31
  critical error I think about the idea of
• 48:32
  like of like the answer to a lot of
• 48:35
  people is more interesting than the
• 48:36
  actual like piece of art.
• 48:38
  >> Yes, dude. Yes. And so like if John
• 48:40
  Carpenter today came out and was like
• 48:42
  actually he was a thing and and you know
• 48:44
  whatever whatever I would be like I
• 48:46
  would simply not care. I would go oh
• 48:48
  that's disappointing to hear that you
• 48:50
  didn't understand this but I'm going to
• 48:51
  forget you ever said that. Thank you
• 48:53
  very much. Because it doesn't matter
• 48:54
  because what matters is the piece of art
• 48:56
  that is in front of you.
• 48:58
  >> Uh yeah it's funny man. I last thing and
• 49:01
  then we'll we'll wrap things up here.
• 49:03
  But um yeah, I I mentioned it on our
• 49:05
  bonus podcast, patreon.com/critical,
• 49:08
  but uh I was listening to this Jewish
• 49:09
  Currents podcast about the movie Marty
• 49:11
  Supreme, and you had these film critics
• 49:13
  who were so sharp that that would say
• 49:16
  something about the movie, and then the
• 49:17
  other one would just wholeheartedly
• 49:18
  tento down disagree. And I'm listening
• 49:21
  to it, having seen the movie myself,
• 49:22
  too. And I'm just not 100% sure who I
• 49:24
  agree with. And there's this kind of
• 49:26
  like preparedness to like great art that
• 49:30
  the the ambiguity is like part of the
• 49:33
  sensemaking. Part of it is supposed to
• 49:35
  be your interpretation and you creating
• 49:37
  that meaning and offering up that
• 49:38
  meaning and seeing if it like uh holds
• 49:41
  water with anybody else. And I and I
• 49:43
  just don't want people to to lose that
• 49:46
  when they talk about video games. And I
• 49:47
  think if there's any lesson to come out
• 49:49
  of this episode with is that I don't
• 49:51
  think that there is a like right or
• 49:54
  wrong way to approach video games or
• 49:57
  approach marketing or approach whatever.
• 49:59
  There's not like a right or wrong
• 50:00
  attitude to have. But I think the key is
• 50:02
  is that you have to think and you have
• 50:04
  to be critical and you can't and not be
• 50:06
  critical in a negative way, but be
• 50:07
  critical in a your thoughts have to have
• 50:09
  more than one layer to them. And it
• 50:11
  can't just be repeating what you think
• 50:13
  is the popular or right take that you're
• 50:15
  supposed to be repeating as a way of
• 50:17
  kind of quickly grasping at authority.
• 50:20
  >> Uh Jake,
• 50:22
  >> one of the most uh frustrating things in
• 50:25
  my opinion about sort of being in the
• 50:26
  game space um is sometimes you try to
• 50:30
  have a conversation and you realize that
• 50:31
  no one is going to actually have that
• 50:32
  conversation with you. I would love what
• 50:34
  you talked about like two people like
• 50:35
  disagreeing about a movie and being like
• 50:36
  I don't know which one I agree with
• 50:37
  because they're both like well yeah well
• 50:40
  yeah well yeah I would [ __ ] love to
• 50:44
  have that conversation with literally
• 50:45
  anyone about a video game. We got to
• 50:46
  disagree more is I guess what I'm
• 50:48
  saying. Um because
• 50:49
  >> I know I try I try I try sometimes. Yeah
• 50:51
  >> you do you try to start things with me
• 50:53
  and I'm but it's always like no I Jake
• 50:55
  we agree.
• 50:56
  >> Um
• 50:57
  >> but like like I would love to have that
• 50:59
  conversation. I just finished Metroid
• 51:01
  Prime 4 last night. I would love to have
• 51:03
  that conversation with someone, but
• 51:05
  every single time I I think I am or I
• 51:07
  like I start like watching like a video
• 51:08
  about it, I I'm just like, we're just
• 51:10
  not approaching this as a piece of art
• 51:13
  in the same way. We're just not we're
• 51:14
  not interrogating this together in the
• 51:16
  same way. And because I would love to
• 51:17
  have a counter interpretation to what
• 51:19
  I'm talking about. I would love to hear
• 51:20
  someone else's opinion that that is
• 51:22
  actually approaching it from the the
• 51:23
  place I'm approaching it from. But I
• 51:25
  don't know, it's frustrating. I would
• 51:26
  love if the comments would express their
• 51:28
  interest in this or not, if this is a
• 51:29
  good or a bad idea, but a truly insane
• 51:32
  level kind of video that we could make
• 51:35
  would be um you know, Peter, you and I
• 51:38
  are I I would say professional Metroid
• 51:39
  Prime 4 haters. I think
• 51:41
  >> a professional.
• 51:42
  >> We have discussed doing a 14-hour
• 51:45
  director's commentary in which we just
• 51:48
  lay waste to every moment of that video
• 51:50
  game as it plays out in front of our
• 51:52
  eyes. I wonder if there's a good video
• 51:54
  idea in getting two people that are like
• 51:56
  at the opposite end of the spectrum as
• 51:58
  us that want to just like have a have
• 52:01
  like a battle royale conversation about
• 52:04
  Metroid Prime 4 and every like 30
• 52:07
  minutes somebody gets kicked off the
• 52:09
  call.
• 52:09
  >> Oh, see that's kind of fun. I like that
• 52:12
  a lot. I like that.
• 52:13
  >> Until there's only one person standing
• 52:15
  and they get to just rant directly to
• 52:17
  the camera about what they feel.
• 52:19
  >> I like that a lot. Um Jake.
• 52:22
  >> Yep.
• 52:23
  >> Before we move on to our sort of final
• 52:25
  segment of our show, I would like to
• 52:26
  tell the listeners a few things. I would
• 52:29
  like to first of all thank the members
• 52:32
  of the Critical Error Nation. These are
• 52:33
  the people who are supporting us on
• 52:34
  Patreon. patreon.com/critical
• 52:37
  error. I would like to specially thank
• 52:39
  the pet the people in the Jake and Peter
• 52:42
  tier, the highest tier on our Patreon.
• 52:45
  That is Andrew Bular, Evan Pon, uh, uh,
• 52:49
  Evan Snee, Mero, and Robert Quesada.
• 52:53
  Thank you so, so much to the people in
• 52:55
  the Jake and Peter tier. We also have a
• 52:59
  sound effect prepared for the people who
• 53:02
  are a part of the critical error royalty
• 53:04
  tier. Jake, what's that sound like? I
• 53:07
  think it's going to be really aggravated
• 53:08
  today. Like,
• 53:10
  >> oh yeah,
• 53:11
  you know. Yeah, let's hear it. Oh, I
• 53:14
  can't believe I have to say these names.
• 53:16
  The Jake and Peter tier first. Anel
• 53:18
  Trait, Andrew Bular, Evan Pon, Evans,
• 53:22
  Snee, Mero, Robert Kada. I Peter just
• 53:26
  said your names. I'm saying them again.
• 53:27
  Okay. The $10 tier, Critical Air,
• 53:29
  Royalty. We've got of course Brianna
• 53:32
  Bossman, Cole, Connor, True Love, Danny
• 53:34
  Disaster, Jacob Richter, James Pierre
• 53:35
  Reed, Jared Koseno, Kale Chow, Pinky
• 53:37
  Oat, Sam Cedar, Sam Woods, Shin, and oh
• 53:40
  no, no, no, no, no, a new name. I can't
• 53:43
  believe I have to say this.
• 53:45
  Thick dick Mystic.
• 53:47
  >> All right.
• 53:47
  >> So, if you are interested in supporting
• 53:49
  us, patreon.com/critical
• 53:52
  error. There you will get hours and
• 53:55
  hours and hours of bonus conversations.
• 53:59
  This week's bonus episode, we were like,
• 54:01
  "All right, well, we've been talking for
• 54:02
  an hour. Time to wrap up." I think it
• 54:04
  was hour 45, hour 50, maybe. It's one of
• 54:07
  those things where
• 54:08
  >> it was my fault. It was my fault.
• 54:09
  >> Yeah. we we started talking about the
• 54:11
  the state of like what it's like working
• 54:12
  in the games industry right now, which
• 54:14
  was rough, and then we were like, we
• 54:14
  can't end here. Might as well talk about
• 54:16
  K-pop demon hunters. So, if that's
• 54:17
  something that sounds interesting to
• 54:19
  you, uh patreon.com/critical
• 54:22
  error. I would also like to say we are
• 54:24
  having and hosting a community event for
• 54:27
  the Critical Error Nation um on Friday,
• 54:30
  January 23rd
• 54:33
  for people who are interested in uh uh
• 54:35
  playing some Animal Crossing New
• 54:37
  Horizons with us with that new update.
• 54:39
  in that Switch 2 version. Um, so if
• 54:41
  you're interested in that,
• 54:42
  >> patreon.com/critical
• 54:44
  error, become the 100th member
• 54:47
  >> of the nation. We're at 99 right now.
• 54:48
  So, whoever is next, you're number 100
• 54:50
  and um it means we love you.
• 54:53
  >> We're we're trying to grow Critical
• 54:54
  Error into something something big and
• 54:56
  increase the amount of opportunities
• 54:57
  that we have available to us. So, there
• 54:58
  is going to be a lot more stuff
• 55:00
  happening on the Patreon. Highly urge
• 55:01
  anybody just just look into seeing if
• 55:04
  that $5 is worth it for you. In addition
• 55:06
  to that Animal Crossing event where
• 55:07
  we're going to go to uh Islands of
• 55:08
  Patrons, we are also doing um a book
• 55:11
  club on our bonus podcast where we're
• 55:13
  reading a real book. So if you want to
• 55:16
  uh get involved with that and if this
• 55:17
  these are the kinds of discussions that
• 55:19
  you think are interesting and maybe you
• 55:20
  started the year and you said I wanted
• 55:21
  to read a little bit more
• 55:22
  patreon.com/critical
• 55:24
  error join the nation. All right. Um
• 55:27
  >> you prepared a written piece for us.
• 55:28
  >> I have. That's what I've heard.
• 55:30
  >> So we got a lot of comments on last
• 55:32
  week's podcast about people being
• 55:35
  interested to hear more about like our
• 55:38
  creative processes.
• 55:39
  >> Yes.
• 55:40
  >> And that is something that we do talk
• 55:41
  about from time to time on the bonus
• 55:42
  podcast, but I thought I would bring
• 55:44
  something here a little that's a little
• 55:46
  strange. So, I am currently writing
• 55:50
  something uh with like defined
• 55:53
  characters and plots and all of this
• 55:55
  stuff. And sometimes when I am writing
• 55:58
  for a character and I'm having a hard
• 56:00
  time accessing something, I will write
• 56:02
  what I'm going to share with you today,
• 56:04
  which is kind of like a mood or
• 56:07
  emotional piece about how a person feels
• 56:10
  or like their their inner mental state
• 56:13
  just to better situate myself in that
• 56:15
  character. So that's what I'm reading
• 56:18
  today. It's like this is this is it like
• 56:20
  reads like pros, but it's not meant to
• 56:22
  be like in the book. It's meant to be
• 56:23
  like underneath the book. and then I'll
• 56:25
  have like stuff permeate through it. So,
• 56:27
  just to situate everybody there. Okay,
• 56:29
  so let's go.
• 56:33
  >> She was my girlfriend, but she had
• 56:36
  rules.
• 56:38
  She never bothered to reveal them in
• 56:40
  like an official way, at least not to
• 56:42
  me, which meant that I never get got to
• 56:45
  decide whether or not I agreed to them.
• 56:47
  It was like being a guest in someone
• 56:49
  else's house. You just learned which
• 56:51
  door stay closed, where to stand. At
• 56:55
  first, I excused it because she was so
• 56:58
  so hot. Surely she knew things that I
• 57:01
  did not. Where we should go, how we
• 57:03
  should spend time, what really mattered.
• 57:06
  My job was just to keep up. Asking for
• 57:09
  clarification would have felt like
• 57:10
  admitting weakness. So, she had the
• 57:13
  system. We didn't eat near campus. Sure,
• 57:17
  it felt small there. school food, people
• 57:20
  trying to look busy. When we went on
• 57:22
  dates, we went into the city. We went to
• 57:24
  museums and stood in front of paintings
• 57:27
  that I did not understand. And I let
• 57:29
  myself believe that meaning was
• 57:31
  happening to me.
• 57:34
  What I really wanted was the walk back.
• 57:36
  The possibility of being seen together
• 57:39
  by someone I knew, some guy who would
• 57:41
  clock it immediately, who would
• 57:43
  understand what it meant that I was with
• 57:46
  her, that I was crossing AC a campus
• 57:49
  with her. Maybe it was a friend who
• 57:52
  would text me later with something short
• 57:54
  and loaded like
• 57:57
  nice. Something that meant I had been
• 58:00
  seen before she took my hand and pulled
• 58:02
  me inside. Right. Her room. That was
• 58:05
  another place we were allowed. But I'm
• 58:07
  getting ahead of myself. I met her
• 58:10
  Kelly. Kelly Kelly when I was visiting
• 58:13
  her class. Her professor wanted a real
• 58:16
  writer to speak to them, which mostly
• 58:18
  meant somebody who could confirm that
• 58:20
  the thing they were studying still
• 58:22
  existed somewhere past a syllabus. So, I
• 58:26
  talked about structure and I talked
• 58:27
  about attention and about how
• 58:29
  withholding can feel like control. And
• 58:32
  while I was speaking, I felt the room
• 58:34
  lean in and when I looked up, she was
• 58:36
  looking at me. At least she's the only
• 58:39
  one I noticed or the only one I
• 58:41
  remember. It was something real. I think
• 58:44
  she held it long enough for me to become
• 58:45
  aware of my mouth and the way I was
• 58:48
  standing.
• 58:50
  I finished the thought I was on and then
• 58:52
  immediately lost my place. Well, I
• 58:54
  wasn't really lost, but I made it seem
• 58:56
  like I was so that I could laugh, so
• 58:58
  that I could smile at her.
• 59:02
  She waited for me after that class just
• 59:03
  outside the door. The moment felt so
• 59:05
  edited. She asked for my number like it
• 59:08
  was already obvious that I was going to
• 59:09
  give it to her. And I and I did so so
• 59:12
  easily. What next? What was next? Her
• 59:15
  Instagram. Oh my god, her Instagram. It
• 59:18
  was immaculate. Every photo was
• 59:20
  finished. She was hot in a way that
• 59:21
  suggested discipline, I think, rather
• 59:24
  than luck. It was obvious that she
• 59:26
  understood presentation as maintenance,
• 59:28
  as something that you had to stay on top
• 59:30
  of. I wanted to be
• 59:33
  I saw her later that week before she saw
• 59:35
  me. She was outside a building on
• 59:37
  campus. She was leaning against the
• 59:38
  brick like it was comfortable. Talking
• 59:40
  to these two guys I recognized but I
• 59:42
  didn't know. One foot was up on the
• 59:44
  wall, her jacket open, phone loose in
• 59:46
  her hand. She laughed once and both of
• 59:48
  them bent forward without even realizing
• 59:50
  it. When she checked her phone, they
• 59:52
  paused waiting, just gawking there,
• 59:54
  breathing. Everyone was just waiting for
• 59:57
  her to come back to move. They would
• 59:59
  adjust. Of course, the whole night would
• 1:00:01
  adjust for her.
• 1:00:04
  She finally noticed me. She smiled and
• 1:00:06
  said my name. Just my name. There was no
• 1:00:08
  introduction. One of the guys looked at
• 1:00:10
  me, then back at her. I had never felt
• 1:00:11
  so powerful in my life. She pushed off
• 1:00:13
  the wall and walked over without looking
• 1:00:15
  back. You know, in person, she was so
• 1:00:18
  much warmer than I expected, hungrier.
• 1:00:20
  The first time we kissed in her dorm,
• 1:00:22
  her mouth came at mine with heat,
• 1:00:24
  pressure, her body already aligned with
• 1:00:26
  the outcome. My hands found her without
• 1:00:28
  being told where to go. When we stopped,
• 1:00:30
  my mouth hurt, and I liked that it hurt.
• 1:00:33
  I walked back to my dorm, flushed and
• 1:00:35
  smiling. My face red from all of the
• 1:00:37
  kissing. I must have looked like the
• 1:00:39
  Joker. We started seeing each other,
• 1:00:41
  though I can't remember the
• 1:00:42
  conversation. We went off campus or we
• 1:00:44
  stayed in her room. Those places they
• 1:00:46
  all made sense in public. She was flirty
• 1:00:48
  without being anchored to me, touching
• 1:00:50
  my arm, leaning close, laughing into a
• 1:00:52
  space right beside my ear. People would
• 1:00:54
  notice her, and I noticed them noticing,
• 1:00:56
  which felt like part of our arrangement.
• 1:01:01
  You know what's so weird? She was just
• 1:01:03
  like a theater kid. We spoke the same
• 1:01:06
  language. She talked about high school
• 1:01:08
  productions, about applause, about the
• 1:01:11
  pleasure of being watched. I think when
• 1:01:15
  she showed me pictures from that time, I
• 1:01:17
  was surprised by how ordinary she
• 1:01:18
  looked. Bad hair, cheap costumes, this
• 1:01:21
  like face that was still figuring out
• 1:01:23
  what it could or could not get away
• 1:01:25
  with. I treated this all as proof of
• 1:01:28
  access of my power. I told myself that I
• 1:01:31
  was seeing something earlier and less
• 1:01:32
  protected. And I didn't question how
• 1:01:35
  badly. I just wanted that to be true.
• 1:01:38
  But in private, she wanted me so
• 1:01:40
  plainly. She would pull me toward her
• 1:01:42
  and expect me to respond. Desire for her
• 1:01:45
  I think was something you handled once
• 1:01:48
  mostly to see if I could. I slowed
• 1:01:51
  things down. She just smiled and pulled
• 1:01:54
  me back in like I was a complete idiot.
• 1:01:55
  I was a complete idiot. Afterward, I lay
• 1:01:59
  there listening to, I don't know, people
• 1:02:01
  in the building settle, voices muffling
• 1:02:04
  down somewhere down the hall, aware of
• 1:02:06
  how often that door was closed and how
• 1:02:09
  little of us really existed anywhere
• 1:02:11
  else with anyone else.
• 1:02:15
  Kelly slept like weather, not stillness,
• 1:02:18
  so much pressure. Her body moved even
• 1:02:21
  when it didn't move. There would be an
• 1:02:23
  arm thrown, a knee finding purchase,
• 1:02:25
  breath loud enough to be counted. 1
• 1:02:29
  2
• 1:02:31
  3
• 1:02:33
  4
• 1:02:35
  I shifted. She followed. I shifted
• 1:02:38
  again, but she stayed. No malice in it.
• 1:02:41
  No intent. So much mass. Her breathing
• 1:02:44
  set the tempo of the room. In.
• 1:02:47
  Out.
• 1:02:50
  In. Each breath. A decision already
• 1:02:53
  made. Out. And I laid there underneath
• 1:02:55
  it. In. matching her rhythm without
• 1:02:58
  meaning to out. My body taking notes my
• 1:03:00
  brain would refuse to keep in. This is
• 1:03:03
  how close feels. Two, this is how much
• 1:03:05
  space you're allowed. Three, this is how
• 1:03:07
  you disappear without going anywhere.
• 1:03:09
  Four.
• 1:03:12
  One. She pulled me in while asleep, her
• 1:03:14
  arm tightening like reflex. I never
• 1:03:16
  resist. I didn't resist. I didn't
• 1:03:18
  correct. I let myself be gathered. There
• 1:03:20
  is something so [ __ ] hot about the
• 1:03:22
  inevitability about not being asked,
• 1:03:23
  about being placed for. Her breath grew
• 1:03:26
  heavier. Mine followed. You stop
• 1:03:28
  wondering what this is. You stop
• 1:03:30
  wondering what comes after. You stop
• 1:03:33
  wondering who sees. I would lay there
• 1:03:36
  awake, heart still working too hard,
• 1:03:38
  understanding something without wanting
• 1:03:39
  to say it out loud that I liked. I liked
• 1:03:42
  it. I liked it. I liked it. I liked how
• 1:03:44
  little I had been required to decide
• 1:03:46
  anything.
• 1:03:49
  I'm thinking about Kelly because she
• 1:03:51
  made me crazy. I think that part's
• 1:03:53
  important for me to say to you. It's not
• 1:03:55
  poetic. I'm not trying to be flattering,
• 1:03:57
  crazy in the sense that I keep replaying
• 1:03:59
  things that I've already lived through
• 1:04:00
  and lining them up like evidence, hoping
• 1:04:02
  the sequence proves that she was real
• 1:04:04
  and not something I invented because I
• 1:04:06
  wanted her badly enough. I'm doing this
• 1:04:08
  now. I'm lying in another bed. Another
• 1:04:12
  girl breathing beside me. Her skin still
• 1:04:14
  warm. The room quiet in the way it only
• 1:04:16
  gets after you're done. I should be
• 1:04:18
  thinking about her. Instead, I'm
• 1:04:21
  inventorying Kelly, the rules, the
• 1:04:24
  rooms, the way she stood, the way
• 1:04:26
  people.
• 1:04:29
  Okay, everybody. This is Jake editing
• 1:04:31
  the podcast. Hello. Thank you for
• 1:04:33
  sticking with me. Oh my god, you're
• 1:04:34
  still listening to uh the piece I
• 1:04:37
  prepared this week. So, in listening
• 1:04:39
  back to the podcast and seeing how long
• 1:04:42
  I was talking and would continue to
• 1:04:43
  talk, uh, reading this story, I've
• 1:04:46
  decided to just cut it off here and
• 1:04:49
  maybe we'll talk about it more in a
• 1:04:50
  future bonus episode on
• 1:04:51
  patreon.com/critical error. But
• 1:04:53
  otherwise, I am just going to go ahead
• 1:04:55
  and skip to the end. Uh, you're welcome.
• 1:04:58
  Okay, see you next time. The end.
• 1:05:04
  >> Wow,
• 1:05:06
  >> that was really long. What a ride.
• 1:05:08
  >> It was incredible. First of all,
• 1:05:09
  obviously it's [ __ ] amazing. Um I
• 1:05:13
  think you hit on some of the
• 1:05:17
  See how when you were in love
• 1:05:21
  like that other person is elevated in a
• 1:05:23
  way that doesn't make any sense.
• 1:05:25
  >> Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah.
• 1:05:26
  >> And I've been thinking about this a lot
• 1:05:28
  >> as I have just gotten married.
• 1:05:29
  >> Yeah. Um, and like the thing that stuck
• 1:05:33
  out most to me about what you what you
• 1:05:35
  just read is talking about like I saw
• 1:05:39
  pictures of her from when she was like
• 1:05:40
  in high school and it was like, "Oh, you
• 1:05:43
  were like so ordinary and you were just
• 1:05:45
  like a person and it was before and I
• 1:05:47
  like what you said too before about like
• 1:05:48
  Instagram and and being like it's not uh
• 1:05:51
  like luck or whatever. It's it's
• 1:05:53
  discipline, right?" And so like looking
• 1:05:55
  good uh you know some people just look
• 1:05:56
  good all the time. But usually those
• 1:05:59
  people uh the reason why they look good
• 1:06:01
  all the time and it seems effortless is
• 1:06:02
  because they've put a lot of [ __ ]
• 1:06:03
  effort in. And that that idea of like oh
• 1:06:06
  but like there was a time before you got
• 1:06:08
  there to that point and you were just
• 1:06:10
  like a kid in like a costume doing like
• 1:06:13
  you know Midsummer Night's Dream or
• 1:06:14
  whatever. And like
• 1:06:17
  gosh, thinking about that like for me
• 1:06:19
  like that is so legit and so real cuz
• 1:06:21
  like
• 1:06:23
  you know sometimes like pictures of this
• 1:06:26
  was this was uh on [ __ ] Christmas me
• 1:06:28
  and Elena were having conversation with
• 1:06:30
  her family about like oh would you guys
• 1:06:32
  have like dated in high school and the
• 1:06:33
  answer was like no like certainly not
• 1:06:35
  cuz this is what I looked like. Do you
• 1:06:37
  know what I mean? And then she shows
• 1:06:38
  pictures of like well she's like well I
• 1:06:39
  looked like this and I'm like oh yeah
• 1:06:41
  you were also like a kid
• 1:06:42
  >> of that time and whatever. And so it's
• 1:06:45
  like this funny thing though where I'm
• 1:06:46
  like I don't know what I expected. Not
• 1:06:47
  that I hadn't seen pictures of her not
• 1:06:48
  from high school, right? But like like
• 1:06:50
  yeah, I don't know why in my mind you
• 1:06:52
  also weren't just an ordinary person. M
• 1:06:56
  >> but it's because and it's to what you're
• 1:06:58
  talking about in this piece I think
• 1:06:59
  because you are someone now who is so
• 1:07:02
  extraordinary and so much like bigger
• 1:07:05
  than uh like larger than life and and
• 1:07:08
  someone who has been so elevated that
• 1:07:10
  it's imp almost impossible to try and
• 1:07:12
  think of you as someone who is just
• 1:07:14
  ordinary because you're not you know
• 1:07:18
  yeah it's funny I'm just I think I was I
• 1:07:20
  think for this character and where they
• 1:07:22
  are in their story they are so Um, you
• 1:07:25
  know, I think I think a lot of stories,
• 1:07:27
  so many stories have been written about
• 1:07:29
  this kind of like feeling of like being
• 1:07:31
  powerless to like this great love that
• 1:07:34
  they feel.
• 1:07:35
  >> Yeah.
• 1:07:35
  >> And I think I'm trying to for this
• 1:07:37
  character, I'm trying to hit on
• 1:07:38
  something that is like
• 1:07:41
  they almost want it to be that they want
• 1:07:44
  that to be the situation, but that's not
• 1:07:46
  the situation. And there is this um
• 1:07:50
  feeling of I think being controlled that
• 1:07:53
  that you don't realize until time makes
• 1:07:57
  that clear to you.
• 1:07:59
  >> And it's like how do you portray the
• 1:08:03
  existence of somebody who
• 1:08:06
  >> is just so committed to telling
• 1:08:09
  themselves, I must I think I have
• 1:08:11
  something here. This this is real. this
• 1:08:14
  is she chose me and that means something
• 1:08:16
  and that and and this this this
• 1:08:18
  justification and this this inventing I
• 1:08:20
  think that goes into your head um for
• 1:08:25
  wanting to make something great and it's
• 1:08:27
  not. And then I think the kind of reveal
• 1:08:30
  that happens late in this piece of he's
• 1:08:32
  having all of these thoughts while being
• 1:08:34
  in like somebody else's bed. It's like
• 1:08:36
  it's like how how degenerate are you?
• 1:08:39
  like like how far does this go that
• 1:08:41
  you're this close to this other person
• 1:08:44
  and you're still thinking about picking
• 1:08:45
  up your phone and going in to see when
• 1:08:47
  was the last time she texted me? Maybe
• 1:08:49
  I'll text her now.
• 1:08:50
  >> Well, not to sound like a crazy person,
• 1:08:51
  but that and like reveal, right? But
• 1:08:54
  like I I feel like that's a common
• 1:08:57
  experience, especially when you're
• 1:08:58
  young. I don't I don't know how old the
• 1:08:59
  they're in college at the very least. I
• 1:09:01
  know, but like I don't know how old they
• 1:09:03
  are in that time, but like when you're
• 1:09:04
  young, at least for me, like that was a
• 1:09:07
  common thing, right? because it was
• 1:09:08
  like, well, the person who I want
• 1:09:09
  doesn't want me, so what do I do?
• 1:09:11
  >> I guess I just move on. But
• 1:09:13
  >> I'd love to get into this more, but I
• 1:09:14
  think that's bonus pod content. So, um
• 1:09:16
  >> I Yeah, you're right. You're right.
• 1:09:18
  Critical Air patreon.com/critical air.
• 1:09:21
  >> Yeah. Thank you everybody for listening.
• 1:09:22
  I appreciate um I think uh again for
• 1:09:25
  anybody curious about process sometimes.
• 1:09:27
  Um I don't know how long was this? This
• 1:09:29
  was like this was like five pages of
• 1:09:31
  writing, I guess. And so much of this
• 1:09:34
  for me is about just trying to surface
• 1:09:36
  something that feels really true and
• 1:09:38
  then maybe like taking that one line and
• 1:09:40
  trying to see if I can build something
• 1:09:42
  around that that surfaces in the story
• 1:09:45
  that I am telling.
• 1:09:46
  >> Yeah. Um, and I don't know, something I
• 1:09:49
  like to do in pieces like this is that
• 1:09:51
  there's there's that moment where it
• 1:09:53
  shifts into verse, right? Or it shifts
• 1:09:55
  into being like far more like lyrical
• 1:09:57
  and they're like in bed together and
• 1:09:59
  it's about their movements and the one
• 1:10:00
  two three four and the breath in, breath
• 1:10:02
  out. And it's like just um experimenting
• 1:10:05
  with like what you are allowed to do in
• 1:10:07
  because like in an actual like novel, I
• 1:10:09
  would never write that. Um, and it only
• 1:10:12
  works when I'm trying to like surface
• 1:10:13
  something in myself. So that's that's a
• 1:10:15
  little process thing that I think Yeah.
• 1:10:16
  >> Here's something else, too. Do you ever
• 1:10:18
  think about the fact that the pieces
• 1:10:20
  that we write also require being they
• 1:10:23
  they it's required that they're read out
• 1:10:25
  loud. And so sometimes it changes the
• 1:10:27
  way I write something because I'm like,
• 1:10:28
  I'm going to I wouldn't write this as if
• 1:10:29
  we're writing it on the page because I'm
• 1:10:30
  writing for something that's meant to be
• 1:10:31
  read out loud.
• 1:10:33
  >> Oh, 100%. And I think
• 1:10:35
  >> Yeah, I think about that, too. But I
• 1:10:36
  also think I'm I'm a particular kind of
• 1:10:38
  reader and I think I I even when I'm you
• 1:10:41
  know I think we could just I could pull
• 1:10:42
  a book off of my shelf and I think I
• 1:10:44
  could give it a little something. You
• 1:10:45
  know what I mean? So yeah. Yeah. So
• 1:10:47
  that's something I think about too
• 1:10:48
  sometimes.
• 1:10:49
  >> Yeah.
• 1:10:49
  >> Um anyway, this was fun. Thank you to
• 1:10:51
  the Critical Air Nation for allowing me
• 1:10:53
  to uh to share it.
• 1:10:55
  >> Yeah. And thank you uh you the person re
• 1:10:58
  listening right now for watching.
• 1:11:00
  Subscribe, comment. We'll catch you next
• 1:11:02
  week. Bye.