arlo makes the point that bobby's character was lessened by the writers being forced to work by not crossing a sort of creative fine line by not giving him a unique design, or by having bobby just be a nickname, but i just.. don't think his arc would have been the same otherwise?
like on paper (hah) it sounds insane that me saying that this paper mario character having a generic name and design is a good thing but i really sincerely believe the completion of his character arc and even olivia's character arc would've had as much impact if not for that. idk
now he's talking about the fact that he doesn't feel immersed with the world and story because of the fact that everyone's made out of paper.....???? huh???????
i quite honestly don't understand the argument he's trying to make here. this is the "paper mario was never about the paper but the STORY" argument that people joke about pushed to the logical extreme
this is the weirdest dismissal of a game's aesthetic/story i've ever seen
the argument arlo's making here flat out (hah) makes no goddamn SENSE
the argument arlo's making here flat out (hah) makes no goddamn SENSE
his argument now is that olly can't be an intimidating villain because of the fact that he's just made out of origami. he's made outta paper, just like everyone
while i agree his motivation could've been expanded upon more.. the fact that he's made outta paper is also the point?
while i agree his motivation could've been expanded upon more.. the fact that he's made outta paper is also the point?
he views the toads as lesser beings, because the toad who created him scribbled on the very paper he was made out of while failing to realize that the very toads he hates are also made outta paper. that's the literal point
another point that he's making that i've seen others make too: the marketing material for the game when it was first revealed was """intentionally vague""" to mislead fans into thinking the game was something it wasn't which... no???
oh god he's getting into the battle system now. here we go
and now he's saying that the ring puzzle system doesn't make any sense, because it's not connected with the world and has nothing to do with the game
the stage plays you were on in the first two games had nothing to do with the game's world either...???
the stage plays you were on in the first two games had nothing to do with the game's world either...???
"the toad bribe system is faulty because i as a player am always inclined to use it and makes battles too easy" we call that an accessibility option arlo you can just not use it. it's ok to not use it i promise you
pressing the x button to ask olivia for help, which also freezes the timer is the equivalent of cheating and turning on god mode in an action game according to him
what
what
his argument that the bosses can be vague with their solutions does hold a bit of merit, i think that was a problem with the vellumental fights in particular but he kinda just glosses over the fact that the letters dropped on the battlefield do a good enough job at explaining?
listen i wanna make it very clear here since people are retweeting my thread now and there's been a lot of traction on it in general that i don't hate arlo or anything. i still very much respect him as a youtuber and everything. and opinions are opinions yada yada
however-
however-
i really don't think this was a good review. it's filled to the brim with so many contradictions, arguments that go nowhere or hold no weight in the grand scheme of things and just feels so surface level for the most part. i agree the game's not perfect, but this assessment-
feels so lackluster? and to dismiss the entire game as nothing more than an ego exercise i think is disingenuous to the charm the story and characters have, and how sincere its more emotional beats feel since it knows when to take a step back