I didn’t see the story as being about mental illness, although I can understand why some people may have as MPD / DID has been used a well worn trope. In psychological thrillers.
I saw it as playing on that trope. Some of the clips make references to Hannah not existing and the clips about fingerprints also raise doubts about the twins theory. Even identical twins will have variations in fingerprints due to what their hands do (scars, wear etc).
The story that Eve weaves about her childhood is hugely rooted in fairy tales and she takes a delight in drawing comparisons, smirking at her cleverness and the ‘fucking idiot’ police. It almost plays like an inversion of the MPD / did route.
The ‘traditional ballad’ reads like the script for the story of the twins childhood rivalry. The level of detail she gives about inconsequential matters like the dollhouse is too much for the context of the interview. She tells stories within stories and then calls back to more stories. They are all dreamy and evocative compared to the leaden rehearsed account of finding Simon missing. She has a captive audience and works the room accordingly (let me tell you a story, let me sing you a song).
I honestly don’t see any major evidence in the game that the character had multiple personalities. If you know of any solid evidence mentioned in the story, please let me know. In fact, like I said before, almost all of the solid evidence seems to point to the fact that these were two separate people. I’m sure someone could come up with some sort of explanation for why the character does not have a tattoo in some scenes, why they were seen in a different city, why they had a black eye that instantly went away in a single day, etc, but that would be very hard to do. The story is just vague overall, so it can have multiple interpretations, but I do think that if you pay attention there is almost no evidence for the theory that this is about mental illness.
Also I’m not sure what is wrong with “Point C” that I made? What part is specifically bad? I stand by the main points: 1.) the game has been positively rated by the vast majority of players and I’ve heard no real negative backlash against it, 2.) there are genuine problems in the gameplay that can unintentionally confuse the player and not make it clear at all what your end goal is supposed to be, or how the game will conclude itself, and I touched briefly on the idea that 3.) the argument over whether something is a “game” or not is basically a semantic argument, and most people assume that when you call something “not a game”, it is an insult. And I think that’s completely wrong - digital entertainment allows us to make all sorts of interactive media that isn’t necessarily a “game” with a specific challenge, progress, and goal. In reality, gamers should all have an open-minded discussion about what makes something a game, and what terms to use for this new, emerging medium of interactive stories, keeping in mind that neither form is innately superior to the other. Which of the main points is it that you disagree with specifically?
Also dammit, I just realized that I skipped the letter D in my previous post, I hate it when that happens.
