- Joined
- Nov 23, 2019
Just to address this point more clearly, because I think I'm coming across as the "plot hole nazi" and that's not at all what I'm saying. A story where all the elements don't add up is bad when the story fails to properly convey what it's about. The Sopranos, for instance, famously ends ambiguously without letting us know Tony's fate--that's not bad writing because the story isn't about whether or not Tony survives (and, in fact, holds the audience accountable for wanting such a judgement). If Shenmue doesn't end up showing what the mirrors actually do, that would be OK as long as we understand why all the elements currently established about them add up. So we need to know what the CYM want to achieve with it and why Iwao thought it was worth bringing them to Japan; what the characters think they do and how it motivates them is far more important than what the mirrors actually do and, atm, we don't have all that information. That's what makes the story incomplete.Just because the meaning behind certain narrative elements is not clear to someone, on its face, does not make the writing poor.
I like stories where things are left open for interpretation as long as it's deliberate and adds something but, atm, that's not what Shenmue is. Do I expect a character to sit Ryo down and explain exactly what the CYM's motivations are? Of course not. But there are other ways to handle exposition and, atm, Shenmue hasn't done any of that yet. There is simply not enough information about the CYM to describe one way or the other what they want to do--that's the difference between something that's left open to interpretation and something that's just left unexplained.It just sounds to me like you could get a lot more enjoyment out of this style of media if you learned how to interpret things for yourselves, instead of worrying about whether or not there will be a "cool payoff."
I'm curious as to what "style of media" you consider Shenmue, as we clearly view the series from different reference points.