Hatt Hanz SotC is more a greek tragedy

Samuel Martin Whitewash much? It’s an oriental tragedy.

@@borgue whats a whitewash

Like a full third of the book is spent lambasting various contemporary political figures. I'm not sure what there is to doubt.

Ed Kazaragy #fuckkonami

#fuckonami

That's a fantastic point actually. And you're right! It was before my introduction to Campbell so your inference was an accurate one. (For whatever that's worth) :D

That's extremely kind of you! I totally get what you're saying and looking back, I think I failed on explaining what I was trying to actually say. There might be some conflicting schools of thought on this but from what I understand, Satan isn't even eligible for repentance much less would he get it after committing the unforgivable sin against God. That's the point I was trying to get at. I was focused on how weird it was that Satan could be forgiven. This is, from what I understand, the current general Christian understanding of God. Let me know if I'm mistaken though. Always glad to know when I made a mistake so I don't make it again. I hope you enjoy the rest of my videos! Thanks for reaching out, man! :D

With different denominations of Christianity as well as cults it is difficult to ascertain the truth of what Christianity says. I don't recall it saying anything on whether Satan could be forgiven but it is clear that it says that Satan wanted himself to be on par with or greater than God "How you are fallen from heaven, O Lucifer, son of the morning! How you are cut down to the ground, you who weakened the nations! For you have said in your heart: “I will ascend into heaven, I will exalt my throne above the stars of God; I will also sit on the mount of the congregation on the farthest sides of the north; I will ascend above the heights of the clouds, I will be like the Most High” (Isaiah 14:12-14)." So the part where he adds "or more" seems to be correct. The part about forgiveness refers to the nature of God in Christianity to forgive us if we ask it of him which is in the bible. There is only one unpardonable sin which is blasphemy (that I understand) which is to resist God's calls to forgiveness and repentance and to exalt oneself as equal or better than God which is pride all ones life. Rather it is possible to assume that Satan refuses to change his ways. There are denominations that seem to portray God as a Smiter but that seems closer to Zeus. I've always known God as forgiving because he is the orgin of all that is good and is said to be both just and merciful.

If we follow covenant theology, which aligns well with the old testament, we see that the static nature of God's character is affirmed. The trinity being existent before the incarnation, and the fact that the old testament is an illustration for the new testament on a physical and spiritual level. The God of redemption and forgiveness is the same jealous God who immanently draws to earth. The morning star, or the accuser, (i am using these terms for the devil because canonical scripture doesnt use samael or any psuedopigraphal or apocolyptic names) was cast out for pride, qnd self righteousness. The hubris of the Satan is what blinds him, either that or he knows that morality is corruptible and faulty and sees no point in behaving according to any morality, so he seeks whomever he may devour, drawing them to his cause and will. Im sorry if this representation strays from the video, but i figure i could clarify, even if time keeps me from being more in depth.

The redemption of satan from my reasoning was reached a cut point when he convinced eve of eating the fruit, or when jesus was crucified. Creating the final sacrifice for sin and solidifying satans responsibility for his action. The unpardonable sin is, from my estimation is attributing the works of God to the works of the devil, the case being when the pharisees said jesus cast out the demon by the power of satan.

Joey Min Thanks so much, man!

Brendan Lyle Thanks so much, man! :D "Not sticking the landing" is the perfect way to put it. I wish I thought of that before I thought of "dropped the ball." That sounds like it could have lent itself to way funnier imagery!

Dan3333333335 Thank you! :D I'm working on getting my next video out to you guys right now! :D

SolePorpoise With that in mind, I'd love to see videos that use a Buddhist perspective and themes (along with those of other religions than the two mentioned here). ^^ P.S. How is Deus Ex: HR going? : )

Elround4 That's fantastic information! Really interesting stuff. Buddhism isn't really in my wheelhouse but I'm learning more about it. I might start looking into it more aggressively, though. :) Deus Ex: HR isn't going *too* great because I haven't had the chance to play it yet. (This Castlevania video took WAY longer than I expected.) I *did* just pick up the Director's Cut though (I was told that's the one I had to play) so as I get more time, I'm going to jump into that. Unfortunately for that specific game, I have a really intense schedule planned for this channel so I'm not going to get the time to play it for another couple months. :(

Thank you! :D I agree. It is an interesting story and it influenced some of the most interesting literature. Don't be surprised if that aspect reemerges because I have at *least* one more analysis that I can think of where it's going to come up again. :D

***** Thanks, man! :D I was nervous about switching up the format so I'm glad it worked. Assuming you're asking me after I just trashed the game: Castlevania: Lords of Shadow did a lot right and it was a fun game to play. It has a lot of great visuals, too. I don't have any reservations about recommending it. I just wish it could have lived up to its potential.

Bostontex 24 Thanks, man! :D Will do. I'm working on getting a pretty special video out by tomorrow, actually. Make sure to check it out if I can make that deadline! :D

John kesh Thanks so much, man! :D That's *very* kind of you to say! Seriously, I'm flattered. :D

I tried really hard to get through it but I just couldn't do it. I still might one day because I keep hearing people love it or hate it. But as far as I could tell from a few hours in, I think I was in the "hate it" camp.

It definitely was interesting but it goes back to be closer to the Castlevania gameplay than the first one. Storywise though I feel it was more coherent and meaningful than the first game's.

Interesting. I'll try to give it a second chance one of these days since the Netflix show has me itching to rediscover the series.

Well thank *you*! I appreciate it. :)

Just posted this video also on artsygamer. I look forward to your future analysis videos like this. In case you're looking for what i think is a similarly underrated game as Castlevania Lords of Shadow (still struggling with the 2nd one due to it's iffy mixture with scifi), I would warmly recommend Dying Light. I think the spectacular thing that they do there is not so much the main story but the environmental storytelling and world building, the way the totally secondary quests with thin dialogue lines interweave with the environmental touches to give the feeling of a "lived-in" world. If one was to go a lot longer into the past to me Planescape: Torment was quite a literary masterpiece that in many ways surpassed many works of written fiction.

Cool, thanks! I've got both on my wishlist. :)

Vlad Ivanovici That's actually come up as a recommendation a while ago from *****. I basically explained that while I really appreciated the themes, I just couldn't get over how much I hated the bad aspects of that game. :( I felt like I was doing a chore by playing the game to get to more story. Eventually I just lost interest and never wanted to revisit it. With that said, I didn't know if the format I did with Castlevania: LoS would work or not. Now that I think there's a *pretty* good response to it *and* this makes the second request for that game (assuming this is a request!), I'll reconsider doing an analysis on Spec Ops: The Line-the good along with the bad. :)

SolePorpoise Having played through it recently, I think you'd be bored by Spec Ops more than anything. Frankly, you're much too intelligent for it. Putting it in a literary context begins and ends with Heart of Darkness. Other than that you have tired themes that have been done several times before in vastly more mature ways and, while intentional, wholly perfunctory gameplay that, I agree, is an absolute chore to get through. I was well bored a third of the way into the game. It's not exactly a compelling piece despite all the love it gets from critics.

WhiteComet623 Ha! Well thanks for the credibility but I'm not too intelligent for anything-that's why I have a Hulu+ subscription! :P But thank you for the kind words, anyway. :) With that said, I'm pretty sure I actually *am* going to do a video on Spec Ops: The Line, if for no other reason than to talk about the *great* with the bad. I think it's going to follow the same template as this video but not quite as jovial because, while Castlevania had some annoying parts, I usually forgot about them not long after I finished them. But in Spec Ops: The Line, the bad parts were so overwhelmingly bad I resented the game for making me go through it. With that said, there was a lot of value just from learning where it went wrong, and there were some shining moments that really blew me away because they were so thoughtful. Where Castlevania: LoS was a good game that could have been great, Spec Ops: The Line was a bad game that could have been great. And yes, "perfunctory" is the word of choice to describe its game play. The reason there's a hold up on this video is because I can think of more fun things to do than play that game again-vacuuming the carpet comes to mind, for example. Anyway, thanks for the comment and (probably unintentionally) getting me motivated to get started on that video. :)

iWillWakeYouUp Thank you! :D So, I'm going to preface my response to you with this: I am so sorry. With that said, I *hated* Lords of Shadow 2. :( In fairness, I'm not entirely objective because I was really hoping the creators would take this opportunity to right their wrongs. I actually thought it was a step backwards. Symphony of the Night let you turn into a wolf, a fire breathing bat, and poison myst. LoS2 let you turn into rats... rats, man! So needless to say, I didn't get to the ending so I can't comment. Would you recommend I give it a second chance? It sounds like you think it has a lot of redeeming qualities.

SolePorpoise Sorry for responding so late. Absolutely, I do think the game has its fair share of positive features. I actually quite enjoy the combat in LOS2. While some environments can look rather bland or at least not very cool, many parts of the game can looks breathtakingly gorgeous or just huge. And... call me stupid, but I was actually excited for LOS2's story. I wanted to see Dracula in action. While bloodsucking is a central gameplay mechanic in that you use it to regain health, the game was just not dark enough. I feel that it didn't know what it wanted to be. It had the (improved) combat from LOS1, but the story and world design went in a different direction In my opinion, LOS2 is worth picking up for cheap. If you own it, I'd definitely recommend finishing it during the summer drought - mainly for the gameplay and the aesthetic of the game.

iWillWakeYouUp Ha! Awesome. I'll keep that in mind because that drought is definitely coming. That's interesting what you say about it not being dark enough, too. From the little I played, inconsistency in tone seemed to be a problem but I couldn't put my finger on it. I think that's an apt assessment though.

Zetetik - Mercury Steam is a spanish dev

Fuck, there goes my half-baked theory! :/

Dr. Snuggles No Dr. Snuggles, *you're* awesome! :D And that sounds horrible. Reminds me of trying to play Dark Souls with a keyboard and mouse. Come to think of it, that was one of the worst days of my life... Did you actually beat the game that way or is that what talked you into playing it with a controller?

SolePorpoise I gave up about halfway through when I´ve spent way to many hours on the boss-fights, I´m to stubborn! Instead of buying a controller I watched the rest of the game in a walkthrough... And Yeah! I totaly agree with you on Castlevania, it could have been one of my favorit games (with the exception of not having a controller) Still, You´re awesome! :)

Dr. Snuggles Hahaha good for you! A man of conviction.

NotMeButAnother Yes, that is certainly full of potential. I am an aspiring writer, and although I am already working on something on my own, I might be inclined to write a story like that. Imagine I get around to do it. Besides ideological conflict, what would you like to see in that story? For example: > Would it be set in a fictional world or in an approximation to our own? > What kind of deity or deities did the pious warrior once serve? > What kind of culture(s) and influences would you want to see? In real life, besides the 200 000 different iterations of Christianity, there is also Islamism, Judaism, Yadizism and the like. Then there is Chinese Folk Religion, Buddhism (Theravada, Mahayana, Tibetan...), Taoism, Sikhism, the many many different forms of Hinduism (the worship of Shakti, Kali, Vishnu, Rama, Krishna, Shiva, Surya, Ganesha, Brahma and others), African mythology, Aztec-Mayan-Inca mythology? There are many influences one can pick. > The kind of society. A feudal kingdom? An empire? A democratic republic, with city-states, much like the ancient greek civilization? Things like that. > The main character. His looks, his drives, his relationships, his past, his methods. > The enemies. Is their existence recorded in the setting's mythology/history? Are there also human enemies? Will the enemies have some sort of connection with the supernatural/divine? And what are their motives and influence?

How a story pans out is quite writer-dependent. If I wrote it myself (which I might), it would almost certainly be quite different from your version. Not that this is a bad thing or that you shouldn’t also write a story with that kind of theme, but I don’t really think anyone can really put another’s thoughts to paper quite as they reside in the mind. Personally, as my expertise in religious criticism is largely based in Christianity I would probably choose to borrow liberally from its scriptures, iconography and popcultural interpretations. It is after all the most influencial religion in western culture, its symbolism is widely familiar and appreciated and familiarity with a religion’s doctrine is a prerequisite for its criticism’s appreciation. Were I to write a story of the kind about Sufism, Hinayana Buddhism or Vodun, not only would my own criticism degenerate into a superficial strawman argument, it would also hold little meaning to the audience and largely serve to cement their own stereotypes and feelings of religious superiority. Similarly, criticism of a fictitious religion is only meaningful insofar as it is applicable to the religious experience of real people and would rob me of a wealth of literary and historical references. This choice influences the answer to a majority of your other questions. A real religion obviously only fits into a fictional version of the real world and defines the religion our protagonist breaks away from. The society isn’t as important to define in detail when writing for a linear video game as it would be in a novel, because the player’s interaction with it is minimal. It is largely a consideration in terms of how it informs the characters, and this, too, is to an extent predefined by our choice of religion. The interesting parts then are indeed the main character, his supporters and his antagonists. Now I’m certainly not going to write out a whole character study in a youtube comment, but let me give a plot outline: what we need for this kind of story to work is a character whose belief is fervent, but honest. Someone who is wholeheartedly convinced of the churches and god’s benevolence and truth and who would consider “lying for Jesus” a betrayal. This person would likely have received kindness and support in his upbringing as well as a purpose in life according to his talents - and as he is a warrior for reasons of gameplay and symbolism, the most obvious choice is a desire to protect his family that has been extended to be projected onto the whole community of the faithful. Rather than give him an actual nuclear family with wife and children, I would be tempted to place him in a church-run orphanage from which to be recruited as some kind of “Templar squire”, which places him in an original community to regard as family while also being raised in the faith from a young age and having experienced the benevolent side of the church. Mind that sometimes the most obvious choice isn’t the best one, but I’m making this up as I go. Furthermore, in this case a familiar concept and viewpoint are important for the player’s experience. Challenging a viewpoint works best if the viewpoint is held or at least understood by the recipient. Beginning the story on the side of a positively connoted church allows us to build up contradictions and contrasts, culminating in a change of character over time. If we let the character acquire angelic powers and interact with angels over the course of the journey we can show angels as very much inhuman beings (easily supported by using scriptural descriptions of the appearance) and juxtapose his removal from ordinary humanity with his clinging to human emotion, especially compassion. In a way we thus set him up as a parallel to a common modern portrayal of Satan that SolePorpoise referenced in his video, that of the being too inherently free to consent to subjugation marked thus as evil. Not only does this make for interesting comparisons with the earlier portrayal of Satan as very much a servant of god, but it is a compelling story precisely because humanity too, although recipient of free will and forgiveness, is created with the express purpose of submission and exultation and met with cruelty upon using their supposedly free will to choose otherwise. We may see the character struggle, as along the path the demands made of him become more brutal and less justified, accusing him of not seeing the big picture, warning not to question god’s plan. In the tradition of Dante’s epic, we may even let him descend to hell and witness the ultimate cruelty and injustice of eternal torturous punishment for finite, and often minor or victimless crimes. This would be set at the end of his deconversion arc and culminate in a meeting with Satan which, if it contains a fight, should feature a short gameplay boss battle after which Satan decides to stop playing around and reveals how puny the protagonist’s power really is in comparison to his, here leading not to a second boss phase but to a daunting realization of powerlessness. We can combine this with feelings of betrayal, should the angels have encouraged him to take the fight, but that’s not a plot element I’ve fully thought through. In any case, Satan can fill in some gaps and reveal some ugly truths. I’m not quite sure yet what to do after his faith is irrevocably damaged, but since I find it silly to have him barge into swords blazing, Kratos style, I would consider having him summoned to defend himself before some kind of inquisitorial court (possibly in heaven, just for the visuals and enemy variety) even though he mostly wants to forget about the whole ordeal and live in peace far from the church. From there we could build the whole gameplay progression arc backwards, with him losing his angelic powers one after the other, being reduced to a tired, betrayed and desperate human being. This could also lead into him accepting infernal powers in order to preserve his life, but I’m a bit reluctant about that. Still, it might make for a powerful moment to have him accused of collusion with devils for something he was forced to do or die. He cannot, of course, win in the end. I suppose we can give the whole thing an open ending by letting Satan take his soul, which is obviously being tortured somewhere in hell, and making him into some kind of demon or devil or possibly just destroying and thereby freeing it. What I’ve been leaving out so far are the important details of characterization and personal relationships. There would be some kind of positive parental figure in the church, friends, a personal relationship with god that changes once angels actually start to communicate with him instead of him just praying silently and listening to his feelings. His interactions with angels would also begin in a very positive light and the first parts of his quests would be legitimately good deeds. Even though the game would be linear, there nonetheless needs to be emotional grounding to the character and relationships are a big part of that. The actual nature of the quest itself is secondary. Maybe it’s related to the retrieval of a holy relic with a fitting symbolic meaning - the shield of Constantine is a thematically appropriate choice, but there might be something closer related to truth in symbolism somewhere. I furthermore omitted any other characters he could meet on the way between the extremes that can make for interesting encounters - I liked the whole “old gods” thing in the video, I would also consider apocryphal characters (Lilith being the most famous). Again, this is a rough outline. In order to not become an atheist polemic (although those are fun to write, and frankly that’s what it sort of is anyway) the story needs to show the good side of the church and the faith, that people often have legitimate (although not rational) reasons to support and place their trust in the religion. One should also note that this isn’t truly an atheist story concept, as it plays in a fictional version of our universe in which god, the devil and angels are real being that can be interacted with. Rather, it is a critical examination of religious ethics and the conflict between humanity and dogma. This doesn’t come through clearly when I concentrate on the corner points and extremes of the plot, but the deconversion needs to be gradual and painful, with a palpable sense of loss and betrayal to it. Subtlety is unfortunately difficult to contain in brevity, and breve is hardly what I can call this post even now, so I shall close here, hopefully having given you an impression of my vision

God didn't smite Job

***** Well I want to say, the main reason Castlevania let me down so hard was because it had so much potential. With that said, let me preface a pretty brief answer by saying it contains spoilers. That twist ending of Dante's Inferno was kind of silly if I'm putting it lightly. The whole message of The Inferno (the book) was that Dante could change his fate because he was still alive. It comes up a lot! There's this idea that he has some kind of diplomatic immunity because he's not yet dead. So when it turns out he actually is dead in the game... well.. talk about confusion. I'm not one of those people who says an adaptation has to be like the book. Castlevania's a good example of this. They were going to tell me a *new* story based on their adaptation of The Inferno. And that's one of the reasons I enjoyed where they were going so much. But on the other hand, I am one of those people who thinks if you're going to do a retelling, don't defeat its original purpose. I think that's what they did in Dante's Inferno (the game). I will give them credit though, I admire the way they really did try to include a lot of the details from the book. I just think the way they did it (having Virgil lecture you before you entered an area) wasn't all that compelling. I hope that answers your question! :D

SolePorpoise It does thanks. And as a token of my appreciation to your videos, I'll be spreading the word of your Mass Effect Video to hopefully win back the hearts and minds of the fans who think they were betrayed by Casey and the Bioware team when EA was really to blame for the short comings, the ending concept not one of them but perhaps the quality of it the first time around. Be a better way to see Mass Effect the way you saw it rather than have the community feed off the poison which is the Indoctrination Theory which would defeat all of the buildup and purpose of the trilogy. Looking forward to what you have in store next.

***** Oh man, thank you so much! :D And I couldn't agree with you more. Indoctrination Theory does defeat the buildup of the trilogy. I couldn't decide if I was just overly attached to my interpretation or if Indoctrination Theory legitimately takes the wind out of its sails. I'm really glad to see someone else has that opinion! Anyway, thanks for all of the support, man! :D

SirSoliloquy Well, the thing is that Dante's Divine Comedy was written at a time where the abrahamic God was still very much the Smiter you read about in the Bible (read Divine Comedy's descriptions of Hell, Purgatory and Heaven to provide context), so, considering the amount of influence Dante's work had on the game, it makes sense to think of God in this game as the Smiter. By which it is not necessary to take modern interpretations into consideration, especially when Pan's existence in the game reminds us of the Hebrew tribes' henotheistic roots. Out of curiosity, though, how accurate do you find those interpretations? Don't get me wrong - considering that the Bible is something that was originally conceived as a conciliation between Law (rules you must follow if you don't want to be punished) and Morals and Ethics (an ideal way of living) at a time where people would execute redheads because they thought they were scorched by hellfire, stone people who disrespected their parents and/or said cures words, and generally rape others with impunity (rape a virgin, you get to marry her; rape a non-virgin, she gets stoned), I am quite glad people now prefer to take it symbolically or metaphorically rather than literally. But where does that leave us? Take the Original Sin, for example. We now know for certain that the current human species is the latest in a long list of previous human species, spanning hundreds of thousands of years in history - life has a past greater than the Bible claims. Naturally, this means Adam and Eve never exist, and christians world-wide accept that. But they also believe that Jesus sacrificed himself to deliver them from an Original Sin that... doesn't exist. I discussed the matter with some people. Some claim it is tradition, which is already a pretty strong motive. Others claim that there are other sins besides the Original, and those are the ones Jesus sacrificed himself to rid humanity of. But it still doesn't explain quite a lot of problems. Because the moment you take the Original Sin out of the equation, you eliminate Man's expulsion from Eden. Do you see what I mean? What is your opinion on that?

"they consider the OT to be the way God *used* to be" No, we don't. If you knew jack shit about Christian theology, then you would know that the concept that God is unchanging is one of the absolute, most basic pillars of how God allows us to understand at least some degree of Himself. The difference between God in the OT and the NT is purely based on the circumstances of the time. For one, the Hebrews outright *knew* beyond any shadow of a doubt that God existed, and yet they *still* disobeyed Him. There wasn't some moment of doubt as to His existence when a sea DIVIDES ITSELF for them to walk through, or when they were being fed with food that God spawned for them in the desert. So, to begin with, sinning against God who is actively, consistently showing His power to you is sort of a big fuckup. It's as if all the Earth heard the voice of God tomorrow, then someone replied to this with, "Go fuck yourself." They're going to get smited for being such an utter jackass in the face of God. Also, sin was more impactful because death as an eternal concept existed and mankind was not yet redeemed. The whole point of Christ's incarnation, death, and resurrection was to reestablish the link between man and God, to enable us to attain to theosis, our origin purpose of creation. Sin still distances us from God, but we ourselves, especially the baptised, are in communion with God in a way that we weren't in the OT. Learn your shit.

Jimbob Jenkins :D Thank you!

They themselves created the bible too, buddy. =]

I was referring to the infusion of the videomaker's perception of Christianity as a whole, not the portrayal of Catholicism in the game. He conflated the two and presented a misunderstanding.

How was it wrong? The new testament does not undo the old testament.

GodspeedHero I had the exact same issue. Done with this content creator

Yes, the NT does undo the OT. He's carrying a cross. This is obviously post OT>> Not to mention those those God smote in the OT didn't ask for forgiveness.

World's Fanciest Bookend if someone thinks dave mattgews band is the best ever, u disagree, thats fine. if u think... something heinous... is wrong, and someone disagrees with you - ???? just a matter of values

BlueMageWithSoulEdge Jesus christ man, the dude didn't burn a bible. Every comment I've seen so far from a person defending their religion has been very unforgiving! Ironic for christians, isn't it? Also video games are an accepted medium of art. Praise be to Odin.

gtfo