This second series of articles is going to go to some darker places which many might find uncomfortable, I'm warning you of this now as it is coming later down the line and for me to consider it darker places, well its pretty dark.
Also for the record I have watched part 3 and will be addressing that later when the time comes
Feeble attempts to form a connection..............
Oh fuck you.
The use of the Darkness in there is actually really annoying because having played and loved that game the initial section and relationship was very much like being in a relationship, many aspects mirrored my own relationship at that time.
Here have a look, and yes if you want to you can stay longer in the game and watch the complete film To kill a Mockingbird.
Then barely a third of the way into the game
Gangsters Kidnap and Kill Jenny infont of you it echoed deeply of losing someone you loved and having no control over it. I don’t mean simply being dumped by text from 100s of miles away I mean never coming back and knowing that character is no more. To claim this is a cheap trick may be right but when the characterisation of them is that realistic and well done its almost disgusting to see the effort brushed aside when its claimed people want more realistic characters or at least connections in game. You see while Jenny doesn't say huge amounts to you, you're not given huge exposition pieces about her life etc you do get to experience what is to an extent a seemingly ordinary evening together in their relationship.
You don't get your information about her thrown in your face but you can pick it up by her actions and the way she reacts. In the game your character of Jackie is so broken up after her death he tries to kill himself. So to brush this aside as a feeble attempt at a connection and a throw away shock death is a serious dis-service to the series as you could just as much throw the death or Mercutio on Romeo and Juliet away in the same way despite its huge plot ramifications as he too is an innocent as such.
Damsels in distress showing a power inbalance...............
this is one interpretation. The other is in a relationship you help one another and get along. Sure some of us may have actually walked bare foot over broken glass for someone they love (don’t it hurts like hell, more so if you get dumped later) the idea of balance in a relationship is important so while I agree with the imbalance being a problem I don’t agree with the implication that it therefore makes the Damsel in distress trope bad. Let me ask, how far would you go for someone you loved ? Well that’s the damsel in distress trope there creating exaggerated insane scenarios which to be honest could happen either way round in most cases its a scenario where the odds are stacked to make sure the person can't fight it and often you'll note the loved one is only able to due to coming to the scene later and witnessing essentially the tail end of it.
Rescuing the daughter................
This extends far beyond the annoyance of justification of the tropes evil here and actually into the fact its attempting to brand a second trope as part of the Damsel in distress Trope. The concept of this trope is empathising with a person who has children. The protective nature of being a parent often leads to comments like “I would do anything for my daughter / son”
Is this a justification for the Damsel in distress trope being wrong just because in some games the captured child is female ? Or is it again another example of a separate trope which has been discussed by others before and pointed out that the issue is writing the child characters convincingly the examples commonly given are comparing Heavy rains protagonist to that of the child character Clementine from the Walking dead games. One easy to note this is to look at another example of this in the film “The Mummy Returns” when Alex is captured by the villains. The idea of a child fighting off gangstaers or super human demons is implying depowerment not based on gender but because “hey they’re a kid for crying out loud” you wouldn't expect Clementine from the walking dead to suddenly go all Buffy the Vampire slayer and kill everything because hey she's just a kid even in this seriously messed up world.
Now if you don't think the idea of a child being de powered is a trope I present to you this.
Yes Scrappy do the one joke character who's whole joke is, he is essentially a little Puppy who wants to fight everything when clearly he'd be no match for it, and even a few times realises this and runs for it. That is if you take the initial imagining of him and not the far more entertaining film re-imagining of him as a pain in the rear with a growth defect.
In Heavy Rain Jason doesn't escape the Origami killer on his own. In the Mummy the scorpion king, Alex doesn't escape the supernatural monster alone. Kids are kids and while there are plenty of examples of kids being powerful character in their own right. The default state of a child is normally powerless to a degree, they can't vote, they rely on parents for most things and they are often an easy target for the media to pick on and for people to aim at for not being good enough or not doing specifically what the public want. To quote Dara O'Briain "you give kids one chance to prove themselves when their exam results come out, you moan about them being terrible all year and then results day comes and they prove themselves with flying colours and what do you do ? You still have a go at them by claiming the exams and test got easier and not that they actually worked hard and achieved because that would prove everything you've said all you wrong"
I man be 24 now but I can still see and am still annoyed at seeing how in reality the youth can and will be the targets of plenty of flack because they have no real voice as such to protest this, or at least they didn't until social media.
Coming in part 4:
-Death & Euthanasia (I did warn you this would go dark)