The fact that ultimately you think what we are discussing isn't fundamentally the same thing just makes me think you are being purposefully obtuse or just combative for the hell of it.
This conversation is becoming surreal. I have replied to you four times (before this post, now five times) since we began discussing the blackmail plot, and only the first of those replies was an argument against what you said. My second reply to you amounted to "That's cool." My third was a clarification of my opinion, since you seemed to think that I was contradicting myself. And my fourth and most recent reply was saying that we agree on at least some things about the blackmail plot, but probably not all things, but it doesn't matter, because we don't have to agree, so we can just drop it. I have no idea how you look at that chain of messages and come to the conclusion that I'm being purposefully obtuse or combative for the hell of it.
Really the only difference in our opinions on the topic is that you are sitting on the fence and believe both that the blackmail is believable and at the same time so weak that people will question the motivations for submitting. It's convenient since this let's you argue both sides and can't be wrong.
People arguing both sides are more likely to be wrong, not less likely to be wrong, because at least one of the opposing sides is likely to be wrong, to some extent. Fortunately for me, I'm not fence-sitting or trying to argue both sides. I've been very clear, and I'm not sure what is tripping you up. But I'll try again.
- I do not think that Lisa's motivation for submitting to the blackmail is inadequate. I think that the threat which exposure presents to her relationships with Danny, Jo, Luca, and possibly Viv is sufficient for her to be willing to comply, provided that she isn't wise enough to disarm the blackmail by coming clean. Since many people aren't wise enough to do that, and since I consider Lisa's motivation to be sufficient, I think that the blackmail plot is believable.
- However, I think that much of the above argument is based on the game's subtext, and I think that many players take a more "surface level" view of the story, and don't consider things which aren't spelled out in dialogue or internal monologues. Because of this, and because I think that PaleGrass should try to make the story clear to as many players as possible, I think that the existing dialogue and monologues should be updated to be more explicit about Lisa's fears concerning those relationships. I think that the fact that this hasn't been done yet amounts to a flaw in the story.
These two points are complimentary, not contradictory, so there is no simultaneous arguing of opposing sides.
You acknowledge people may find the motivation for submitting weak.
Again, I don't find her motivation to be weak. The only reason that some other people may find it weak is that it hasn't been stated clearly enough for them, if they don't read between the lines. That's not the same as finding her motivation weak. Her motivation is strong, and it's already conveyed in the game, but not explicitly stated. So it should be made clearer.
I've said I don't find her going along with the blackmail to be believable given the circumstances.
And this is where we disagree. You don't find it believable, given the circumstances. I do find it believable, given the circumstances.
Are those two statements really that different or offer opposing views?
Yes.
For some reason though you again seem to believe I either mistook your statement or misunderstood it. At no point in this discussion have I misunderstood, mistaken, or 'seemed to think' incorrectly what you've said and what your position is.
You clearly have mistaken or misunderstood me, because you think that I find her motivation weak, which is incorrect. You also seem to think that I have been debating you nonstop, while only my first reply to you on this topic (and this reply) has actually been argumentative. My other three replies have been "fist bump", "Allow me to clarify...", and "Yeah, we agree about some things, and we don't have to go on arguing about the other things."
My OP on this topic was simply that I didn't find the reason's she would go along with the blackmail to be believable and questioned the reasoning behind the decision as she is at least an adult with an average mental capacity, but then again she is naive, simple, and an airhead with no critical thinking ability or sense of responsibility. As you said previously she really is THAT dumb.
And when I say she really is
that dumb, I mean dumb enough to make the wrong choice, which is the same degree of foolishness as a large percentage of humanity. My criticism of Lisa's character when she submits to blackmail isn't that she lacks intelligence. It's that she lacks the integrity to bite the bullet and come clean. It's foolishness, not stupidity - foolishness being worse than stupidity, in that it seems to be more widespread and often has worse consequences.
But she'll come out on top in the end.
