Right, I forgot we finally have Beast Nero in Arcade.
Right, I forgot we finally have Beast Nero in Arcade.
Originally Posted by Deathhappens
The Seven Deadly Sins are a lazy, overdone cliche that doesn't make much sense anyway. I'm so glad that they didn't decide to rely on those.
Eh, i think the nasu sins are too hard to grasp most of hte time
They're a bit nebulous at time, but it's not like you need a philosophy major to understand them. They're certainly far more interesting than seeing 'Gluttony' for the thousand-and-one time would be.
The Seven Deadly Sins are at once easy enough to grasp because of all our cultural priming and incredibly malleable depending on the writer or society, so I think they work better than the sins that began their life in Nasu's head which he must explain to us.
Pity is just inherently more interesting than Pride just by virtue of not being as overused. You COULD twist pride to fit the same concepts but why would you.
And frankly, as a TM fan I am more interested in the stuff that Nasu makes up anyway.
Last edited by pinetree; December 26th, 2021 at 08:24 PM.
Like I said, lazy. They're an easy shortcut. Goetia's sin being 'pity' that cause him to show extreme condescendance towards people is cooler than just taking on pride.
Also, I'm interested in seeing a writer actually writing and come up with their own stuff 'in their head'.
If you actually read into the original Logismoi, those sins are already quite a bit more interesting than our more clichéd interpretations of them. Sloth isn't just laziness, but spiritual apathy and complacency as well, and Gluttony doesn't just involve food for example.
Also, I initially gave Nasu the benefit of the doubt regarding the sins, but he hasn't really impressed me with them.
- - - Updated - - -
He just hasn't done the best job explaining his Sins to us, though it's not all bad.
imho once you already know Goetia, "Pity" becomes much more direct as a sin in comparison to his character. "Pride" lacks the same subtletly and thus you'd need to make a further mental jump to better interpret the term in a way that fits him. I feel that "Beast of Pride" would simply lack the direct impact of "Beast of Pity", on top of being much more boring.
Not wrong, but I feel if you title him the Beast of Pride, you set up viewer expectations one way, but when you reveal how he qualifies, it subverts those expectations and engages with dialogue with our cultural assumptions about the Seven Deadly Sins.
Byegod mentioned this too, but what sins haven't been well explained? Is it just Treasuring? And even that is pretty obvious once you look at how Koyan acts.
So, you'd still have to explain the sin and what it'd mean for the Beast. Which make your complaint about Nasu's original ones moot.
The seven sins are still a narrow crutch, even if you take the original meaning into account, and they become horrible when authors try to apply them to situation where they obviously don't fit. See also Persona 5's trying to claim that guilt and self-loathing is Wrath, which involves more stretching than any of the Nasuverse' synchretism.
So you want him to subvert your expectations?
Last edited by Byegod; December 26th, 2021 at 09:00 PM.
Comparison also feels like a more convoluted Envy, and also, what's Beast III's Sin again?
Beast III is ‘Pleasure’ with each half having a separate aspect of it. L has ‘Pleasure + Depravity’ and R has ‘Pleasure + Lust’.
Cool. I've actually changed my mind, and I think the sins we've got make enough sense. My only issue is now with who takes which spot based on what criteria? Still don't know.
Well we didn't get to really explore Fou as a Beast to understand where his sin comes from, but just looking at his powers, it fits more than envy.
Yeah, I'm iffy on that too due to Comparison and Cherishing/Treasuring but hopefully they'll take this chance to explain it.
I feel like your whole reason for hating nasu is that you "don't understand" what he writes at all and think it's "badly explained" or "lol subversive!" when it really isn't and it's mostly on you for not getting it, and it's not that complicated at all. You just need to distance yourself slightly from what's common sense to you or what you take for granted in concepts of language and fiction but it feels like you're reluctant to do that. it's fun, you should try it.
I think you're asking a bit too much of him, mostly because someone has asked him to do this in some form or another about 3 times.
Dont talk down to me like that, I've seen the concept done better, i can just point at ff14 for a similar idea done better
I just dont like lectures on the nature of humanity from obscure obtuse sins that could be done with a better word, i personally dont expect vitch treasuring or fou's comparison to be done well
I dont mind sins being a bit done odd or not 1-1, a cold wrath like say FMA for example, or Envy from darksiders 3 being someone who wants to copy and looks like a deviantart OC as its final boss form as its just a bunch of shit thrown together
But when you have to say comparison and then add a lecture for what it means its not really a singular sin is it?
If you have to explain something like comparison in a long full diatribe it feels like a simpler word would work better, espeically as complexity allows for more snafu's or fuck ups
Sins can take multiple angles, greed can be just muh gold, or it can be wanting things at the extent others miss out, or it can be wanting everything and so on.
Last edited by Byegod; December 26th, 2021 at 09:52 PM.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
