Leaked Life is Strange prequel

[silversyx]

It seems that Life is Strange is getting a prequel. If it's true, I'd love to play it. Thoughts?

http://kotaku.com/images-of-apparent-life-is-strange-prequel-pop-up-1795732410

https://www.polygon.com/2017/6/1/15724248/life-is-strange-prequel-leak-deck-nine-games-report

[hexen]

Oh goody, a prequel. Nothing more exciting than following boring characters before there was any kind of mystery or mysterious powers! I hope the prequel takes place in the timeline where Zoe was crippled, because it's the only time where her character wasn't completely awful and unsympathetic (also I laughed my ass off when it happened, despite having predicted it). Or if it was a sequel, it should focus on the party everyone held after she got shot because nobody would miss her. In case you haven't caught it yet, I hate Zoe.

Also, the other characters where ranged from not too interesting to almost as awful, and Max & Zoe's friendship was completely forced and unbelievable, and game's story was overall H-E-L-L-A stupid.

In other words, I guess I am not too excited, hehe. E;R will tell you in more detail.

[ignition365]

Oh goody, a prequel. Nothing more exciting than following boring characters before there was any kind of mystery or mysterious powers! I hope the prequel takes place in the timeline where Zoe was crippled, because it's the only time where her character wasn't completely awful and unsympathetic (also I laughed my ass off when it happened, despite having predicted it). Or if it was a sequel, it should focus on the party everyone held after she got shot because nobody would miss her. In case you haven't caught it yet, I hate Zoe.

Also, the other characters where ranged from not too interesting to almost as awful, and Max & Zoe's friendship was completely forced and unbelievable, and game's story was overall H-E-L-L-A stupid.

In other words, I guess I am not too excited, hehe. E;R will tell you in more detail.

Her name is Chloe.

[hexen]

Oh goody, a prequel. Nothing more exciting than following boring characters before there was any kind of mystery or mysterious powers! I hope the prequel takes place in the timeline where Zoe was crippled, because it's the only time where her character wasn't completely awful and unsympathetic (also I laughed my ass off when it happened, despite having predicted it). Or if it was a sequel, it should focus on the party everyone held after she got shot because nobody would miss her. In case you haven't caught it yet, I hate Zoe.

Also, the other characters where ranged from not too interesting to almost as awful, and Max & Zoe's friendship was completely forced and unbelievable, and game's story was overall H-E-L-L-A stupid.

In other words, I guess I am not too excited, hehe. E;R will tell you in more detail.

Her name is Chloe.

Ooops, shows how much appreciation I have for her character, hehe. Well, I got the rhyme down!

[silversyx]

Oh goody, a prequel. Nothing more exciting than following boring characters before there was any kind of mystery or mysterious powers!

Well, for all we know, Rachel Amber had powers.

[fauxshot]

Oh goody, a prequel. Nothing more exciting than following boring characters before there was any kind of mystery or mysterious powers! I hope the prequel takes place in the timeline where Zoe was crippled, because it's the only time where her character wasn't completely awful and unsympathetic (also I laughed my ass off when it happened, despite having predicted it). Or if it was a sequel, it should focus on the party everyone held after she got shot because nobody would miss her. In case you haven't caught it yet, I hate Zoe.

Also, the other characters where ranged from not too interesting to almost as awful, and Max & Zoe's friendship was completely forced and unbelievable, and game's story was overall H-E-L-L-A stupid.

In other words, I guess I am not too excited, hehe. E;R will tell you in more detail.

Her name is Chloe.

Ooops, shows how much appreciation I have for her character, hehe. Well, I got the rhyme down!

Aw man, I am actually of the complete opposite opinion. xD For me, Life is Strange is probably one of the most dramatic and, perhaps, emotional games I've had the pleasure of playing.

I guess what I would say to not liking Chloe, and feeling that the friendship was forced, is perhaps that it must be looked at from a certain perspective. I'm going to get into super-duper spoilers, but since this is a prequel thread I assume that's okay.







You have to consider that, in a certain way, Chloe's character isn't supposed to be friendly and likable. She's abrasive, straightforward, kind of an asshole, mostly to everyone except for Max, though she's also this way towards Max too. But you have to consider why she acts that way:

1. Max up and left her, and never spoke to her for years and years. They might have been young, but Max was her best friend. What really is sort of the source of that anger though is...
2. Chloe's Dad dying in the accident. Even if Max would've never spoke to her, Chloe may have just moved on if it wouldn't have been for her Dad dying. She loved her Dad to pieces, and on top of her Dad leaving, so did Max; Chloe lost two people who were dear to her in a short amount of time. I imagine her Mom wasn't around much trying to pay the bills at the diner. Chloe must have felt terribly abandoned and distraught on both accounts, as one really reinforced the other. Again, on top of this:
3. Her Dad being replaced by what's-his-name-I-can't-remember. Chloe's hardheadedness, and her new Dad's, were not a good match. It made for a sort of toxic family environment. Especially because Chloe failed to understand that, despite Her new Dad's hardheadedness, he was truly wanting the best for her, and (I believe) for him to be accepted into the family. Keep in mind this is a veteran trying to re-adjust to civilian life, a guy who definitely saw his fair share of things, and is probably suffering his own trauma. The game didn't go into it much, but I thought it was a nice nod at the struggles that former military men and women go through as they try to reintegrate into society.
4. Rachel. Rachel Rachel Rachel. Another person who abandoned her, a person she truly loved, just like Max and her original Dad. If she was abrasive before, I imagine this added to the hurt, as it was another person who seemingly up-and-abandoned her. In a certain sense, we could also see why this contributed to her anger with Max, because (depending upon how you play the game) Rachel was sort of a replacement for Max... or, was Max a replacement for Rachel?

That's what I liked about the relationship between Max and Chloe; on the contrary, I didn't feel that it was forced in the same way. While they are partners in crime throughout the game, a few small choices sort of let the player determine the relationship between these two. I chose not to write Max's name on the wall in the junkyard; nor did I have Max kiss Chloe. In the same way, she never kicked it off Warner (I think that was his name?). Sure, these choices were brief, but they allowed me to create the story a bit myself. 'My' Max struggled to understand her and Chloe's relationship in the game; was Max just a Rachel replacement? Could she replace Rachel? Or was Rachel a replacement for Max? I used these choices to create a version of the story in which 'my' Max never fell in love with Chloe, not in a romantic sense. Rather, Max's journey was about rediscovering an old friendship, and realizing that while she could rebuild an old bond, she couldn't replace the one Chloe shared with Rachel. In the end, 'my' Max chose to not save Chloe; for her, the meaning of the journey wasn't just preventing it's central tragedy/the murders, but also being given the chance to make amends with Chloe and rediscover the bond they once shared.

So again, on the contrary, for me it didn't feel too forced, because I felt that 1. their partnership is just sort of a given to a certain extent, and 2. these small choices allowed me enough agency to determine what kind of bond it was that Max and Chloe shared, as well as how Max felt about others, and what the journey meant for her.

I really liked Kate's character, but I did feel that after she got better in the hospital, her part just kinda got swept under the rug... which was sad. Kate was one of my favorite characters, and her chapter was the most powerful one in my opinion, I would have liked to see a little more of her in later chapters, it just felt too cut off.

But I'll also say this; Chris (DashV on here) felt differently than I did on some parts, as well. I didn't find chapters 4/5 to necessarily be all that moving, but due to his experience with being a father and having a kid of his own, I think He was able to relate more with some of it's content, and therefore it was more powerful for him.

Of course, I have no problem with us disagreeing! But I hope these words may give you something to mull over. One thing I enjoy about games like persona is how you can hate a character, but over time learn to like them, and understand them. I feel like Life is Strange is similar in that regard of allowing your perceptions of characters to change, at least slightly.

For me, the game's shortcomings were...

1. Chapter 2 being so strong, and the following chapters not keeping up that tense, suspenseful feeling. Kind of like getting to the best part of a roller-coaster early, then the rest being kinda tame in comparison.
2. The Kate issue.
3. Not being given an option to hug Chloe before/after making the final decision. THAT WAS NOT FAIR I WANTED TO HUG HER LOTS.
4. Once it instituted the whole butterfly-effect thing, I felt like it lost a bit of it's originality, since it reminded me of the movie. It wasn't bad for the game, it just made it feel a little less original to me.

So yeah, it holds a special place for me as a very dramatic, moody, emotional game, but I do feel that it fell a bit short of it's true potential.

As for a sequel? I dunno, I like one-offs. I mean, who doesn't love Kill-La-Kill? But a new season wouldn't be good; it's better to let some things die with dignity. But hey, the prequel could be grand, so I guess we'll have to see.

[ignition365]

Well they are making a sequel... but from what I can tell, it's new characters, new local, etc.  I'm hoping personally that the "Life Is Strange" series isn't all about butterfly effect shit, but absolutely different mechanics with the same core gameplay and a story about how life can be a strange thing.

[glazball]

Wow great writeup fauxshot.  I think you pretty much nailed it.  I highly enjoyed the game and I can see why some people would not give a crap about it.  Also, I'm not sure that a sequel or prequel or whateverquel will be anywhere near as good... but my fingers are crossed.  Let's hope Dontnod put the same level of talent and creativity into the next one.

[fauxshot]

Well they are making a sequel... but from what I can tell, it's new characters, new local, etc.  I'm hoping personally that the "Life Is Strange" series isn't all about butterfly effect shit, but absolutely different mechanics with the same core gameplay and a story about how life can be a strange thing.

That was definitely one of the game's strong points, which Chris pointed out when we talked, was trying to figure out the game's philosophy towards time travel/etc. I think a lot of what made Life is Strange interesting would be lost if, like you said, we were to start out knowing all these powers, how they work, etc.

Then again, for Max, the crux of the power was linked with photography. Maybe it works differently for someone else? (I.e. a painter might use bottles of paint, another might use old toys, etc.).

But yeah, the whole 'life can be strange' thing certainly might be a good common thread... and it's so true. o.o;;; Ever since I played the game, stuff happens that just makes me go "life is really, really strange." xD

And thanks, Glazball! There's certainly a lot more that could be said about it; Chris and I wanted to record our thoughts on the game, we just never got around to doing so.

[glazball]

Few things I picked up around the net...  Please correct me if I'm wrong

The prequel involved Chloe and Rachel and does NOT involve the time-reversal aspect.  That kind of worries me because it might end up like a Telltale game... which can be fun, sure - but may be more of a cash-in if not done right.

Dontnod is NOT doing the prequel but is instead secretly working on a true sequel.  If true, that's really exciting!  I'd love to see where the story goes with Maxine.  I might skip the prequel and wait for this one.

Sorry I can't source this and I'm too lazy to google right now  

[argyle]

In the end, 'my' Max chose to not save Chloe; for her, the meaning of the journey wasn't just preventing it's central tragedy/the murders, but also being given the chance to make amends with Chloe and rediscover the bond they once shared.

This ties to my #1 complaint about the game, the ending. You DON'T make amends. Nothing you play in the game actually happens (unless you choose the "bad" ending which isn't much of an ending at all - the devs made it clear that was the "wrong" choice). I hate any game or movie, any story, where in the end if the characters had just done absolutely nothing it would have all ended up the same. And that's literally what the ending to this game is - you go back and do nothing.

I don't hate the game, I thought it had several well-done ideas. There were choices throughout the game that felt like they had a real impact on the story and that you weren't forced one way or the other - which makes the way the ending was handled that much more glaring.

I will say that it is STEEPED in hipster culture, and that bugged me a little (I'm getting a little "get off my lawn!" in my old age I suppose ). I also didn't like how the game seemed to be forcing some aspects of the story, but at least you WERE given a choice regardless of if it felt like it was pushing you in one direction.

But yeah, the ending absolutely killed it for me. If it had ended with Max going to the art exhibit, her and Chloe were friends again, happy ending - I'd have a much better appreciation of the game. Heck, they could have killed Chloe at the end, it didn't HAVE to be a 100% happy ending, and I still would have felt satisfied. But the whole idea of every single thing I did in the game being pointless just really irritated me.

[fauxshot]

In the end, 'my' Max chose to not save Chloe; for her, the meaning of the journey wasn't just preventing it's central tragedy/the murders, but also being given the chance to make amends with Chloe and rediscover the bond they once shared.

This ties to my #1 complaint about the game, the ending. You DON'T make amends. Nothing you play in the game actually happens (unless you choose the "bad" ending which isn't much of an ending at all - the devs made it clear that was the "wrong" choice). I hate any game or movie, any story, where in the end if the characters had just done absolutely nothing it would have all ended up the same. And that's literally what the ending to this game is - you go back and do nothing.

Ok so first MAJOR SPOILERS THAT'LL RUIN THE GAME IN THIS POST TOOT TOOT SPOILER TRAIN COMING THROUGH YOU HAVE BEEN WARNED READERS BEWARE IF YOU HAVEN'T PLAYED i WOULD JUST SKIP RIGHT OVER THIS THANK YOU.

Also, as I reread my post, I'll ask you to keep this in mind. I think our differing opinions are partly a result of what each of us values in the game. I feel that your perspective (and what you value in your experience with this game) largely prioritizes game design/mechanics, whereas mine favors the game's philosophy. So I'm hoping that I can convince you to, before reading on, perhaps allow yourself to shift your perspective more towards mine a little bit. You don't have to change your opinion, but I think if we frame our dialogue in this way, our differences in opinion make much more sense!

Please feel free to have me explain or expand on anything mentioned here!

Hi Argyle! Allow me to address a few of these points, hopefully I can change your mind haha. 

I'm going to address this criticism in a few ways, so allow me a long response, here.

First, let's consider "you don't make amends." By this, I assume that you mean making amends with Chloe, correct?

I would sort of disagree. Let's look at a phrase Chloe says in the ending (before you make a choice):

"Look at what's happened in Arcadia Bay ever since you first saved me... i know I've been selfish but for once, I think I should accept my fate... our fate."

"Chloe!"

"Max, you finally came back to me this week, and you did nothing but show me your love, and friendship. You made me smile and laugh, like I haven't done in years. Wherever I end up after this, in whatever reality... all those moments between us were real, and they'll always be ours. No matter what you choose, I know you'll make the right decision."

From this, we know that Chloe feels Max has more than made amends with her for any past wrongdoings.

That leaves us with the reverse: does Max feel she has made amends with Chloe? From the ending scene, Max does clearly show that she cares for Chloe, from the hug/dialogue to saying that Chloe is her "number one priority". Again, I do think it's sort of up to the player on how they want to interpret some things/impose their own feelings upon Max (to a limited degree here), but I guess my question would then be, if not this, what does it mean for the player/Max to "make amends"? I feel that by making Chloe feel how she felt, and Chloe saying what she said, it's clear that Max has made amends for her absence or wrongdoings toward Chloe in the past. Not to say that she doesn't feel some guilt, still, for everything.

Now, I suppose you could also mean "making amends" towards other people in the game, but this is a key part of Max's struggle during her dream/vision/perhaps another alternate reality that she undergoes and wakes up/time hops from right before the ending choice (I mean that thing with the maze and the copies of all those people, limbo or whatever). She's struggling to understand/come to terms with a lot of things, including what she's caused to happen to other people (what I mean here by "making amends" towards others). Whether these are actually real people from different timelines, or just dream images reflecting her guilt, she's clearly struggling here with what she's done to others in the course of using her powers, and taking responsibility/making amends.

That conflict is important here, and again, it's sort of up to the player to decide what all of this means for Max, though Max is obviously distressed by it (I'm trying to be careful in all of this walking the line between player interpretation and what the game says for itself). I think the choice in ending is an extension of this interpretation by the player (as I sort of mention later, your interpretation of the ending is tied in with how you interpret your choices in the game to have meaning, or alternatively, lack meaning), but I'm not going to elaborate here, I don't want to be too long-winded.

Nothing you play in the game actually happens (unless you choose the "bad" ending which isn't much of an ending at all - the devs made it clear that was the "wrong" choice). I hate any game or movie, any story, where in the end if the characters had just done absolutely nothing it would have all ended up the same. And that's literally what the ending to this game is - you go back and do nothing.

So first, let's address the notion that there are two endings (or rather, two choices), a "good" choice and a "bad" choice.

By this, I assume that you mean the "good" choice is allowing Chloe to live in this reality, and the "bad" choice is sacrificing Chloe after going back in time? What makes each of these choices good or bad for you?

I'm going to argue for subjectivity; that there is no good or bad choice ever present in this game. Rather, there is the interpretation by the player of one choice as being the right choice to make, and one as being the wrong choice. I actually had a conversation with Chris about this during my early game experience. I felt that one choice was being rewarded by Chloe or an NPC with approval, while another was met with their backlash; was this the Dev's way of painting a clear right-or-wrong narrative? In reality, as the game shows, this is not the case. Part of the experiment in choice is allowing the player to see how characters react, and (without actually asking it) asking the question "how will you react to their reaction?" If Chloe gets mad at you for sticking up for her Dad in Her room, will you change your final decision on how to handle the situation? It may feel as if the dev is steering you a certain way, implying "that was wrong" by Chloe being mad at you...

Later on, however, you may see that Chloe took her Dad's gun, and see how Her Dad is struggling to try and keep her "on the right path," and get Chloe to accept him as Her new father, and that He means well. This perspective may change how you interpreted that situation, in terms of what the right and wrong choice was. If you also consider that she later implies she may kill him if He lays a hand on her again, you can't help but to wonder if this decision was actually the 'wrong' one, and you should have picked the other to avoid a future conflict.

Now, I'm not going to deny that the game makes some obvious statements, with bullying being wrong, etc. I think they expect players to make certain decisions (like thinking Chloe's new Dad is an ass and siding with her), and reveal information later that may change your mind (revealing that Chloe's new dad isn't actually a total jerk, and giving you information that may make you sympathize with him). But I think that it's not a matter of a choice being right or wrong here, even if the devs have some strong opinions on bullying, etc.; rather, what they are really saying with every choice is that life has consequences; this is made even more apparent by the phrase stated after every choice, "this action will have consequences." It's not about right or wrong, good or bad, it's about making a choice and living with it.

[*NOTE: There may be the argument "but my choices didn't matter/have consequences, since they didn't effect the outcome!" Two things: first, they did matter to the player at the time, when we didn't know how they'd matter, and impacted your game experience accordingly. Keep in mind that at certain points in later chapters, we also don't know if Max will have time rewind, which reinforces this experience throughout. So from the perspective of game experience, they do matter, even if the impact on game mechanics is minimal or nonexistant. Second, they may not have effected the last choice mechanically, but all of your choices were important in that Chloe/Max's relationship couldn't have been mended without them, and that even if you change your decisions, Max's memories (and yours) of what happened are irreversible. Max, and consequently the player, are effected in a philosophical way, even if the game isn't effected mechanically through a non-binary final choice.)

A slightly better example is Chloe when she's disabled, in her bed. Did you assist her with suicide, or deny it? There is never a statement made which implies a right or wrong choice here; it's a topic that is very relevant in recent times, and had some spotlight in California with the legislation happening concerning it not all that long ago. The game doesn't protect you from Chloe's reaction, however; if you make a choice, you will have to live with it.

One more choice, the junkyard, where you choose to keep the gun or let that guy have it. Is there a good or bad choice? No, there is a choice that allows you to keep the gun but put the guy on your bad side (Chloe reward you by implying badass status), and there is a choice where you lose it, keep drug seller on your not-so-bad side (and Chloe disapproves). Is Chloe's reaction a gauge for what is good or bad, right or wrong? No, not objectively; there's merits to each, and in the moment where you don't know how this choice plays out, it creates a complicated consideration. However, Chloe's reaction is used as a tool to perhaps make you re-think your choice, and plays into the game's mechanics of time-reversal and making it worth seeing different reactions, etc.

Hopefully, this evidence will convince you to approach the game's choices, from first to last, with an objective lens rather than right/wrong/good/bad. After all, we could argue the merits of what makes each ending good or bad. Is it really a good ending if you're choosing to kill countless others to save one life? Is it really a bad ending if you lose one life to save many lives, not to mention all the destruction in Arcadia? Is it really a good ending if you're choosing to allow Kate and others to suffer emotional and physical trauma they endure throughout the game? Is it really a bad ending if you're preventing this trauma? Seeing the game in such stark black/white choices (almost like... black and white photography???  ) is going to diminish the game an awful lot, and perhaps works counter-intuitively to the actual game design, which can result in you actually enjoying it less.

(I'm not asking you to abandon an opinion about a choice being good/bad, just the idea that these choices are designed in a way that presents one as being good/right and the other as being bad/wrong.)

As for the ending/choices not having meaning... well, didn't they? Again, it's game mechanics (answer: no, technically they didn't effect it) vs. philosophy (answer: yes, they did). All of these alternate realities exist, after all... or... do they? The game never completely explains how all of this works, but then again, we are seeing things from Max's perspective, and she doesn't really know, either. We won't go into multiverse vs. universe, which from a theoretical (not gameplay) perspective impacts this argument decisively.

That being said, I can't change your taste in games. If you like games that have multiple different endings depending upon how you act, this certainly isn't your game... but I would encourage you to think about this as a journey; as they say, it's about the trip, not the destination. Now, I won't argue that the game does lose some of it's effectiveness when you learn that you have the ability to basically undo any past decision (as I said, I wasn't a huge fan of this 'butterfly effect' direction, as it had already been done before). However, I believe the game offers a lot in exchange, including what we've been discussing here. (Adding a note, as I mentioned before/later in this post, I think this design choice is a very deliberate one... the transition from having a feeling of non-binary choice to a binary ending is important for philosophical and narrative reasons, as I hope I evidence well enough overall).

In terms of narrative, however, there were only really ever two choices to make, at least according to Max. You use your powers, save Chloe, and endure the storm, or you choose not to use them, Chloe dies, but no storm happens. It sounds as if this is your real complaint; feeling that your choices never really mattered. As I said before, though, the ending is actually a very important, yet minimal, part of the game; what the story is actually about is Max's journey along the way. Even if  you choose to let Chloe die, it wasn't really for nothing- you did stop the murdering teacher, and equally important in a sense, Max had the opportunity to make peace with Chloe. That was the butterfly's gift to you.

Alternatively, you could save Chloe's life, also the butterfly's gift, but you have to live with these consequences, which is the butterfly's proverbial curse as well.

But this is a much bigger discussion. We could talk about the idea (or rather, illusion) of choice as a game mechanic and philosophy in it's own separate post lol. So here's a few questions I'll leave you with, not necessarily to answer, but to ponder:

1. What, if either, is fundamentally more important; the experience that choice as a game mechanic provides, or the function of the mechanic (i.e. allowing the player impactful choices which actually do change the game) itself? Or, are they equally important? OR, does this vary from game-to-game?
2. Why, and when, do players feel dissatisfied with the mechanic of 'choice'? Does this happen when a players' expectations of the functions of choice do not coincide with the game's actual design? If so, what causes this? Should this be implemented intentionally (if so, how/why?), or avoided outright? Does dissatisfaction happen when players feel they do not have enough agency, when they aren't aware of choices existing, etc.? Why do players feel this way?
3. Choice as a game design is actually more accurately 'the illusion of choice', as choices are always limited; how do we acknowledge this fact, yet at the same time design a game which makes choices feel meaningful to the player? And, again, what makes a choice feel meaningful?

I don't hate the game, I thought it had several well-done ideas. There were choices throughout the game that felt like they had a real impact on the story and that you weren't forced one way or the other - which makes the way the ending was handled that much more glaring.

Like I said, I partially agree in that these choices feeling as if they had major impact worked to it's benefit- however, I also felt satisfied enough with the ending and the general idea around alternate universes/etc., so while I did hate to lose that impactfulness, I was satisfied enough (*EDIT - if you take the final questions I pose at the end of this post into consideration, I think it explains why taking away this feeling of nonbinary choice, and giving you a binary choice, is important, and actually helps the game philosophically).

I understand you to be saying here that earlier choices didn't feel binary (as in the options were binary, the outcome didn't feel binary, because it felt as if these choices could interact to cause the appearance or disappearance of countless other decisions).

I will say that it is STEEPED in hipster culture, and that bugged me a little (I'm getting a little "get off my lawn!" in my old age I suppose ). I also didn't like how the game seemed to be forcing some aspects of the story, but at least you WERE given a choice regardless of if it felt like it was pushing you in one direction.

I understand haha, totally a personal preference thing. But dude, you gotta let yourself get caught up in the moodiness of it to enjoy it haha. It's visuals and music, as well as the weight of the game itself, really make it such a moody/dramatic experience, and that's one of the things I appreciate most about it probably. When I hear SYML's acoustic version of "Where's My Love", it takes me right back to the game.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b3LJlZBWI8w

I like to look at it this way; this game could have never existed how it does now, at any time before the hipstery-stuff existed. Unlike Max, we can't go forward or backward in time to enjoy it... the way that we can experience it now, as people living in this time, is unique, and nobody else will experience it the same way we can. So try to enjoy it in that sense, I suppose.

But yeah, the ending absolutely killed it for me. If it had ended with Max going to the art exhibit, her and Chloe were friends again, happy ending - I'd have a much better appreciation of the game. Heck, they could have killed Chloe at the end, it didn't HAVE to be a 100% happy ending, and I still would have felt satisfied. But the whole idea of every single thing I did in the game being pointless just really irritated me.

But was everything really pointless? Ah, these are the things that keep us up late at night...

As I mentioned, I would argue that it wasn't pointless from Max's view. But this feeling of pointlessness, this question of pointlessness, is paramount to the game, and an essential factor which plays into the player's final choice. Really, it's the exact same question that Max is faced with as she makes that choice, too...

What does all of this really mean?

Chris pointed this out, so I'm going to paraphrase him here. What does a choice matter if I can change it? If I could go back and change my past choices after seeing the future, would I? What does that say about me? How does it change how I feel about myself, and how I see myself, as a person? How does it change how I see others?

The most important of these questions being the first two:

Does a choice matter if I can change it?

If I could go back and change my past choices after seeing the future, would I?

And, let's add one more of paramount importance: if I could choose to have this ability, would I?

There's a question to keep you up at night.

[TL;DR - From a purely mechanical perspective, I understand your problem with the ending; there's no getting around that argument, as it simply isn't designed that way. But hopefully, this helps to bring some understanding/enjoyment of the game in other ways. )

[ignition365]

I doomed the whole town.  That seemed the right answer given how fucked the entire town is in general.

I'll put that on MY "Get off my lawn" attitude.