Didn\'t really change much, per se, but still an extensive enough edit that I feel compelled to mention it.
Spoilers for Super Dangan Ronpa 2 and V3
I disagree with your assessment that this applies to Super Dangan Ronpa 2. The game would be bad if went for something like \"this is all a dream\" sort of thing but the simulation had a purpose. It helped create a backstory that shared similarities but was much different from the original.The narrative was able to focal point around its general mechanics, include a new cast, connect with the old cast, and avoid being redundant. The game left the player guessing but by the end it fully explained itself and ingrained its plot into Dangan Ronpa canon with little difficulty. I always saw Super Dangan Ronpa 2 as a great example of how to write a sequel to a narrative heavy game. I also disagree with the \"violence and depravity\" part. The violence in the murders always had a purpose, and I felt like Leon and Mondo\'s deaths in the first game was far more gruesome than most executions in the second game.
In V3\'s case I wanted it to be alternate universe but I wanted completely disconnected from the original source material. Instead they connect it in the most bizarre way imaginable. The whole \"hope vs despair\" was always kind of corny, but rather than analyze other aspects of human nature, the writers seem more content to shake the definitions around in a shoebox and see what comes pouring out. The meta of the plot felt too outrageous and the general setting and foreshadowing didn\'t do enough to build the world they were trying to create.
I liked Super Dangan Ronpa but V3 really felt like it was trying too hard to squeeze substance from already used resources rather than go in a different direction.
I don\'t think Super Danganronpa 2 is as bad as V3 on either count, but the biggest problems of V3 are just extensions of problems within 2. That awful character whose whole plot revolves around creepy serial killing and incest, for instance, is just an attempt to redo the some of the more-disgusting sexual content from 2, only moreso, and front-and-center rather than in implication. The \"false identity\" plot is just trying to redo the \"lost memories\" plots from the first two titles, but bigger, and seemingly ignorant to how it undermines the rest of the story.
And, of course, both 2 and V3 try to take the characters in a less-grounded, more over-the-top direction I\'m not sure I really appreciated.
I will say that I liked 2, and did not like V3, but I personally view it as a step down from the first game on multiple points. We can probably agree to disagree on that, but even you seem to admit that V3 is, unfortunately, a logical endpoint rather than a statistical outlier by a number of different metrics.
...And now I\'ve been flagged. Whelp.
That's what happens when you do something as vile and unforgivable as providing your opinion.
I can only tolerate this series' excessiveness because of the country of Japan it originates from, the self-awareness it clearly professes itself to acquire, and because of the fact that it does NOT work how Five Nights at Freddy's does by obscuring certain spectacles of the story and instead revealing nigh every twist included and causing the real need for extra sequels (The officialised number for Danganronpa's extras is only three, counting the sequel, Komaru's extra time as a Player Character, and the separate game) to be mitigated. It was also written by someone 30-years-old and so its professionalism is rather surprising.
Does it though? I never really feel like it does become truly self-aware. And its attempts to comment on itself in V3 are rightly the most panned and unpopular part of the game.
Then I guess it's just my conception...
I know I'm a year late but this review seems to be entirely complaining that games outside the first actually tried to, you know, tell a more complicated story with three dimensional characters and an overall grey morality where every choice the characters make has positives and negatives, as opposed to the first game which rams HOPE IS GOOD, DESPIAR IS BAD down the player's throat like a Captain Planet episode. Additionaly 2 and V3 actually put a lot of effort into developing the supporting cast and fleshing out the students and their relationships with each other, while 1 has three relevant characters out of 16 and everyone except for Makoto/Kyoko/Byakuya are simply there to provide gags every once in a while. That is especially bad when the lead, Makoto, is an almost insultingly generic and flat character with no complexity or personality traits beyond being a pandering Nice Guy.
So yeah I pretty much 100% disagree with everything you've written here.
At the risk of indulging rather than shunning the dread necromancer... Well, I suppose my argument is that they did the opposite.
Later characters are more over-the-top, but possess fewer dimensions. None of the \"joke characters\" of the first title were as one-note as Akane or Teruteru, for one. And how is the morality of later titles any less grey that the first one? People in all three games commit horrible murders for understandable if not sympathetic reasons. I argue that it is the tone that darkens, not the moral framework.
And wha? None of the later titles successfully evolve their themes past HOPE GOOD DESPAIR BAD either; they just muddy the waters with incoherent nonsense. The closest thing to an example of a \"HOPE BAD ACTUALLY\" character is Nagito, who is also the worst-written character in a game that had both Teruteru and Hiyoko, and motivated entirely by a private despair besides.
Sure, Makoto\'s not an especially deep character; it\'s a plot point. Neither is Haijime, which is also a plot point, nor Shuichi, whose flatness caused riots in the streets, helped kill the franchise, isn\'t a plot point, and makes little sense besides. I prefer the way the first one handled it, where Makoto\'s being boring is actually just because he\'s got his life together and isn\'t ever gonna give up and stop giving a shit, but I appreciate Haijime\'s complex over not being special. It\'s the clumsy, clunky retroactive continuity about Hope\'s Peak Academy I don\'t appreciate, not him as a character.
As to the first game having only three relevant characters... eh? Yes, Yasuhiro\'s a waste of skin who exists only to be unbelievably stupid so the player can feel smart by explaining things to him, and is a joke character who isn\'t funny. So is Akane. And they\'re both one character in the game. What, none of the murderers or murder victims are \"relevant\" now? How does that logic even work?
Like what you like man. If you appreciated the later titles for their spectacle and their holy-shit revelations more than the first, \'s your life and take joy where you find it. I don\'t write reviews to tell people what to think; I write them to tell people what I think. And frankly, when you come at what I think, and haven\'t thought much at all about what you think and why, it feels very, very personal.
Okay, saying I was mostly attacking your points rather than making my own is a fair criticism, so I'll go over them.
- While it's true that none of the main protagonists are especially deep characters, Hajime and Shuichi are far, far more in-depth than Makoto. They both have major character arcs and go through sustained development throughout the game and different facets of their personalities are explored, such as Hajime's more cynical and jerkish side and how the game focuses on his insecurities/identity crisis more and more, and how Shuichi is forced to almost be the villain of the last few cases throwing people under the bus with lies and leading the other students down a dark path "for their own good". I'm not saying Hajime and Shuichi are anything amazing, but to compare them to a character as flat as Makoto, who has zero character arc and zero personality traits beyond nice and relatable to your average player is somewhat absurd. Hajime and Shuichi are actual characters, Makoto is a player self insert, and when that OC-stand in is supposed to be the main protagonist of the story it is very hard to get invested.
- While I don't have as much of an issue with Kyoko and Byakuya as I do with Makoto, they are also both bland and simplistic characters when compared to the much more layered characters you get in the later games (such as, yes, Nagito). Kyoko is the only real character in the entire game with a major development and storyline but it's a very cliched and simplistic "Defrosting Ice Queen opens up and shows her true goodness" type thing you can see in thousands of other animes, and when she's not doing that she's busy ruining the gameplay and mystery by providing exposition on exactly how every case went down, since god-forbid the game doesn't hold your hand and player actually has to figure out stuff on their own, right. Byakuya is a failed attempt at a redemption arc ruined by the writing going out of its way to make him as dickish and unlikable as possible even after his supposed face turn while also still wanting to portray him as an anti-hero and a satisfying survivor. Imagine if, idk if you've watched Avatar but imagine Zuko going through the same plot progression as he did in the real show, except his personality stays exactly the same and he's still vowing to capture the Avatar and ranting about the superiority of the Fire Nation even as he's working with the Gaang. That's Byakuya's arc and it's stupid.
- The later games, particularly V3, do far more of a job at exploring and developing the side characters. Looking at V3...everyone with the exception of Tsumugi for obvious reasons has some sort of a character arc and a lot of scenes that give context to their personality. Kaito and Maki and Kokichi are obviously major characters with big storylines, Himiko has a very detailed and rich arc, Keebo gets significant development throughout the last few cases, etc. DR 1 is very comfortable giving its side characters the occasional good one-liner and nothing beyond that.
- Even setting aside Hiro...what's Toko's arc other than Genocide Jill jokes? Hina's storyline exists but it's entirely confined to Chapter 4, otherwise she's merely there to be the nice girl. What's Taka's arc? What's Hifumi's arc? What dimensions and/or depth do any of those characters have? At all? Even beyond that to the game's format, are any of them outside of Makoto/Kyoko/Byakuya ever helpful in a single trial? Do they ever come in with information that ends up being relevant to the murder? DR 1 functions as Kyoko and to a lesser extent Byakuya solve everything and everyone else idly stands around and gives side comments, as opposed to just watching a Class Trial in V3, where almost every character, even the comic relief and stupid ones, contributes to the discussion and advances the plot, and, crucially, the game allows the supporting characters to be right; in DR 1 being correct about something is a privilege only afforded to the main trio.
While I understand having issues with the later games's more outlandish plot twists, it's not so much as I "enjoy the spectacle" as I enjoy a game with interesting and three dimensional characters over one with incredibly simplistic characters shoving obvious conclusions down the player's throats. A simple story is not inherently better than a more messy and complicated one.
Rather than respond too deeply, I think I might suggest that you would instead be happier making a review of your own.
Your responses to this entire conversation have basically spelled out that you aren't interested in seriously discussing and defending your opinions, which is fine, but I'm not going to apologize for challenging a bunch of claims in a disccusion forum that I think are wrong.
I\'m not trying to be mean. Just saying that when I\'ve written such an in-depth analysis in comments before, I\'ve found that writing my own review makes me feel better.
Also, I\'m having to post from my phone and typing a lot is hard.
Umm, Wary, what Spectral is trying to say is that if you have this kind of love for the franchise and really wants to show the world what your opinion is, then maybe it would be a good idea to make a review of your own instead of replying here.
I don\'t necessarily love Danganronpa, although I was very into it a few years ago. I\'ve just had this argument about the later games being a massive improvement over DR 1 a lot and I had the time to put it all into one post. There\'s no need to be condescending.
Dude, the only one here that is being either condescending or mean here is you. Nobody else is trying to do so.
Wary, I think your comment got removed there.
I was typing a response and then realized I have no interest in continuing this conversation, so I deleted it but it sent anyway.
The twists in the following games are founded on the same ideas, the line of reality. In the first game it\'s the question of whether all of their suffering and motivations was real if it turned out that there wasn\'t a chance for them to meet their families/fulfill their ambitions anyway. In terms of narrative execution, it\'s true that Kodaka is even lazier in the following games, it sometimes feels like a first draft, which is a shame considering his apparent talent. But I don\'t see how the twists are for twists\' sake if they\'re thematically relevant to the core of the series and are still foreshadowed and explained within their narrative?
Leave a Comment:
Spectacle creep is a hell of a drug.
Let's start on an up note. The original Danganronpa (or at least, the Vita remake) was a pretty great self-contained story that ended perfectly but still left plenty of mystery and concepts for sequels to explore. It had well-written characters, some of whom were exactly who they appeared, some of whom were imposters, plants, or otherwise had ulterior motives, and some of whom were good people who snapped under the pressure of the situation and did terrible things. While some characters got cut down too soon, a few additional game modes, while grindy, gave the player the chance to see them fully explored. Even the most unlikable characters were interesting enough to carry engagement. And, of course, the trials were fun logic puzzles that dripped with style, a few clunky minigames and the usual quirks of the genre aside.
But, unfortunately, that's not what made it famous and popular. Lots of unexpectedly brutal and gritty violence and a series of whacked-out, surreal twists that often forced the player to completely rethink earlier events did.
The sequels have mostly refined the gameplay of that first installment to make the trials and adventure game elements more fun, and while some have doubled-down on making the cast more-ridiculous and silly, they at least usually manage to get some actual emotion out of the reader.
But, unfortunately, they have *also* chosen to take those final twists further and further, more and more surreal, and, well... Inevitably, putting in twists for twists' sake and trying to shock the audience rather than tell them a good story leads to an audience that feels cheated and lied to rather than excited by a good surprise.
Plus, they pushed the setting, stories, and characters into darker and darker places, turning more and more background characters and setting elements monstrous and corrupt, until, even after a reboot in the most recent title, almost literally the whole world, except for a very small number of victims, is decadent and rotten through. Worse, they sometimes try to one-up the on-screen violence and depravity with uncomfortable results that are not only bad storytelling but just plain bad taste.
In addition, while the first game's themes weren't exactly the most complex thing in the world, they were well-presented and well-linked to the narrative. Subsequent games have gotten... weird with it. Things like trying to equate hope to being just as bad as despair, that sort of thing. It doesn't work, and it reeks of trying to add thematic depth and heft without really knowing how to.
I won't say the series has gotten bad, but it's certainly failed to evolve in a way that causes it to improve, and the reason is clearly trying to one-up previous titles' content rather than making theirs interesting on its own terms.