Today’s update for It Takes Two adds support for Steam Deck and game invites through the Steam friends list, and removes the need for the EA App launcher.
Thanks for the explanation, although I don’t find it a particularly acceptable one. The sequence wasn’t funny enough to justify the dramatic shift in tone in an otherwise family-friendly game, IMO. Also, making the protagonists unlikable in a game where you’re supposed to find them sympathetic is a very weird design decision.
I’ve never played the game or even heard of this scene until reading that article and the sense he gives is so unsatisfying to me.
I think if you view it as a metaphor for divorce, it could make sense. Something the parents feel they have to do for their own health and well being that is nonetheless catastrophic for many children. Their children’s life as they know it, their sense of security, is carefully and methodically being ripped apart.
I could see that, but he didn’t really go there, it was just that the parents are so egoistic they just do whatever they believe is right.
I mean, sure, but it could be a powerful scene if framed properly, but it really sounds messed up.
Yeah, you’ve pretty much hit the nail on the head. After hearing the dev’s justification I can see what they were going for, but it’s really poorly handled in-game IMO.
They way it plays out in the story feels neither darkly comic nor a poignant commentary on parents going though a divorce; instead it just comes across as unnecessarily cruel, and the player has no choice but to go along with it.
The issue isn’t the use of conflict as a dramatic device per se; it is essentially forcing the player(s) to perform a seemingly unnecessary and unpleasant action against their will.
The fact that both main characters in the game appear to immediately decide that violently murdering their child’s favorite toy is the only course of action and that no alternative is offered is really jarring. Giving the player some agency in choosing an alternative way to to go about it would have solved the problem completely.
Giving the player some agency would get all players avoiding this scene completely. Nobody would do it. And yet there’s plenty of other games that force you to do things you don’t agree with, for the sake of the story being told. Not sure why people get mad at this one. Once you play it you realize it’s their lowest point, and they start changing and rebuilding after that.
I’m curious about comparing this to say - the white phosphorus scene in Spec Ops: The Line, or the airport scene (“no Russian”) in COD, rescuing Ellie instead of giving humanity the cure in The Last of Us…
All things that are arguably a lot worse than pulling a leg off a stuffed Elephant and all require on-rails player action in a game.
This is not a game for your six-year old. It’s a game talking about divorce, ffs. It’s the main theme, and they mention it a lot, if i remember it correctly. They receive counseling from a book of love, full of Latino sex innuendo.
My daughter and I were really mad about this. She wanted us to quit the game. I don’t think it’s really funny or useful to the story either. Still a really fun game.
Yeah, I absolutely get the anger. My wife in particular hates cruelty to animals, fictional, plush, or otherwise, so it’s a line she refuses to cross. That’s a totally fair outlook
My wife found out about The Elephant Scene and refused to ever play it as long as she lives
Yeah… that was a fun surprise for us.
Was it fun though? Or was it awful?
Man I really like the scene for it’s dark humor but it’s so hard to watch, lol.
Game overall is fantastic though! Definitely good with a significant other.
Yeah, that part was a distinct bum note in an otherwise enjoyable game. Why the developers thought it was good idea, I’ll never know.
https://www.pushsquare.com/news/2021/04/exclusive_josef_fares_discusses_the_infamous_elephant_scene_in_it_takes_two
Now you know!
Thanks for the explanation, although I don’t find it a particularly acceptable one. The sequence wasn’t funny enough to justify the dramatic shift in tone in an otherwise family-friendly game, IMO. Also, making the protagonists unlikable in a game where you’re supposed to find them sympathetic is a very weird design decision.
They’re terrible parents for the majority of the game, this is just the culmination of all their selfishness and self deceit.
I’ve never played the game or even heard of this scene until reading that article and the sense he gives is so unsatisfying to me.
I think if you view it as a metaphor for divorce, it could make sense. Something the parents feel they have to do for their own health and well being that is nonetheless catastrophic for many children. Their children’s life as they know it, their sense of security, is carefully and methodically being ripped apart.
I could see that, but he didn’t really go there, it was just that the parents are so egoistic they just do whatever they believe is right.
I mean, sure, but it could be a powerful scene if framed properly, but it really sounds messed up.
Yeah, you’ve pretty much hit the nail on the head. After hearing the dev’s justification I can see what they were going for, but it’s really poorly handled in-game IMO.
They way it plays out in the story feels neither darkly comic nor a poignant commentary on parents going though a divorce; instead it just comes across as unnecessarily cruel, and the player has no choice but to go along with it.
To take the devils advocate position: is conflict not necessary for drama, and effective conflict is one that affects its audience?
The issue isn’t the use of conflict as a dramatic device per se; it is essentially forcing the player(s) to perform a seemingly unnecessary and unpleasant action against their will.
The fact that both main characters in the game appear to immediately decide that violently murdering their child’s favorite toy is the only course of action and that no alternative is offered is really jarring. Giving the player some agency in choosing an alternative way to to go about it would have solved the problem completely.
Giving the player some agency would get all players avoiding this scene completely. Nobody would do it. And yet there’s plenty of other games that force you to do things you don’t agree with, for the sake of the story being told. Not sure why people get mad at this one. Once you play it you realize it’s their lowest point, and they start changing and rebuilding after that.
I’m curious about comparing this to say - the white phosphorus scene in Spec Ops: The Line, or the airport scene (“no Russian”) in COD, rescuing Ellie instead of giving humanity the cure in The Last of Us…
All things that are arguably a lot worse than pulling a leg off a stuffed Elephant and all require on-rails player action in a game.
The difference is my six-year-old daughter isn’t going to be playing Spec Ops: The Line or Call of Duty.
This is not a game for your six-year old. It’s a game talking about divorce, ffs. It’s the main theme, and they mention it a lot, if i remember it correctly. They receive counseling from a book of love, full of Latino sex innuendo.
https://www.pushsquare.com/news/2021/04/exclusive_josef_fares_discusses_the_infamous_elephant_scene_in_it_takes_two
My daughter and I were really mad about this. She wanted us to quit the game. I don’t think it’s really funny or useful to the story either. Still a really fun game.
Yeah, I absolutely get the anger. My wife in particular hates cruelty to animals, fictional, plush, or otherwise, so it’s a line she refuses to cross. That’s a totally fair outlook