There’s an increasing trend of remedial media literacy among modern audiences. People miss obvious narrative moments and thematic elements, only really engaging with media on a base level, perhaps due to sheer amount of content they’re ingesting every single day. This most recently became clear with the release of Life is Strange: Double Exposure , a sequel to the original Life is Strange (2015) game featuring a return to the franchise’s original protagonist, Max Caulfield.
Fandom is a double-edged sword. While it provides comfort, and a familiar surrounding to those who engage with it, there’s always something unspoken hanging over the discussion. Expectations and the weight thereof are always omnipresent in a fandom as large as the Life is Strange community, and with that comes toxicity .
Fans of the franchise weren’t at all happy with the fact that Chloe, the secondary protagonist of the original Life is Strange game, wouldn’t be in this title, regardless of the player’s choices that were made throughout the course of the original game. After all, the games are sold under the pretense that choices matter, so why would that particular choice not factor in? In Life is Strange , fans were faced with the choice of sacrificing a town to save Chloe or sacrificing Chloe to save a town. When it came to Life is Strange: Double Exposure , the fans who chose to save Chloe had a problem with the fact Chloe, a beloved romance option, wasn’t in the game.
There are many r.