Category:Weird route ontology (Deltarune): Difference between revisions

Things which have been affiliated with Deltarune's weird route.

Chapter 2[edit]

9999. [S] "a large person could fit inside"

Chapter 3[edit]

Chapter 4[edit]

1. "it might be your imagination" (Deltarune) 1:(-)1:(-)1

Miscellaneous[edit]

9999. [S] red shatter effect / shattering red thing
9999. [S] Alphys was India; do me -> the motif of machine-translator-garbled works suddenly turning something sexual for no reason when it doesn't make sense in any context including its "own context". [1] this motif is notable because it raises strange questions like: is a character threatening sex scarier than a character threatening disfigurement? arguably yes. people have varying kinds of individual boundaries which to cross are varying amounts of terrible. Freudians seemingly oversimplify this in acting like sexual boundaries are representative of any other kind of boundary. back to Deltarune: this explains the strange discourse over the shattering red thing in Chapter 4. some people were burned that the shattering rose/hand/heart was censored, although they had no real reason to be. other people got very offended at this reaction assuming they were crusty old misogynists who want everything to contain rape jokes and that's the reason they didn't want it changed. some people took the theme of rape being metaphorically represented in Deltarune to be maximally offensive, like a serious line had been crossed. the other people thought that if the game portrayed it negatively a metaphor was a metaphor and a horror story was a horror story. I think what this really shows is what a hair edge societies exist on now. we don't actually trust anyone and we almost have to take the slightest appearance of a signifier of bad people as a sign of bodily danger because if we actually both run into bad people and alert them to our presence every error basically turns into stalking. individuals or localized groups of people kill and terrorize each other over the smallest things now. so the question to ask isn't whether people can reasonably label someone's reactions to a video game a threat. the question is why the hell we are still playing video games and thinking any spaces are safe instead of genuinely asking about the material causes of this pattern