The difference between Mio and Mayu is that Mayu is not emotionally stable and can dip into insanity on top of being possessed by an overwhelmingly negative source throughout the game. She also both wants Mio to follow her but also to leave and escape alone because she wants Mio to be safe despite their promise, and she also at two points in the game tries bringing something up to Mio but decides against it which I think is her wanting to confess her falling on purpose and manipulative ways out of guilt but deciding against it because of what she could potentially lose which in my opinion absolves her enough of her most dark moments (Frozen Butterfly)
That actually makes Mio's game over scenario seem more plausible to me, personally, as it then adds the question for Mio, “Is she even my sister anymore?” I also don't feel like it is consistent to give Mayu a free pass for emotional instability when Mio has potentially been under stress her whole life from her sister, let alone the stress of being hunted by a village of murderous ghosts. Why is it ok for Mayu to not have a grip on her emotions but Mio has to be in control of her own 100%? It feels like a double standard.
Mio however is shown to be very emotionally stable and to not have any hints of insanity in her at all. She's shown throughout the entire game to be a caring, loving, and self sacrificing person who would never abandon someone else for their own safety.
I think those are some pretty heavy personality assumptions both in context of the game, and for a 15 year old character. Mio is still a child, and this entire game is pretty heavy material for an adult with many life experiences.
If there's a chance of someone being able to be saved by you putting your life at risk then you should do it because it's the right thing to do and proves you to be a good person.----------------------------------------[snip for space purposes]-------------------------------
If you truly love someone you will risk life and limb for them regardless of the situation. Otherwise you didn't love them in the first place and were just keeping them around or at most liked them. Love is selfless and unconditional and unless you're insane in which case you aren't capable of being held accountable because of messed up thinking then you will always be willing to risk your life for others, especially those who you love.
I promise you I read everything you wrote, and trimmed it purely for brevity's sake. And I'm going to be frank, I think you are being completely unfair in your assessment. People are not perfect. If one selfish act under extreme, horrible circumstances is enough to make someone “evil” there are far, far fewer “good” people out there than you think. I don't think weakness is synonymous with evil, but I do believe weakness is what makes evil possible. But I also believe genuinely good people can make very bad mistakes. Mio also kills her sister in the canon ending, but that isn't viewed in nearly the same shade of negativity as her leaving her sister. I know there are people who believe she did so out of possession, but there are others that argue she did it in part out of internal resent to Mayu.
I agree that love is selfless and unconditional. But I don't agree that it is good or kind to outright dismiss people as evil or claim that they never loved someone at all if they make a bad decision under severe stress. People have breaking points. It doesn't make the break ok at all, but such an unforgiving outlook feels contradictory to your stance. I agree the best of humanity is worth fighting for, but condemning someone as evil so easily isn't fighting for it. Helping someone better themselves and improving their weakness is.
People should be held accountable for their actions, and I think that game over shows that Mio is being held to hers. It also implies some immediate regret when she starts calling for Mayu by herself. Also, that ending set-up suggests that Mio acted on impulse, not clear thinking, as the further you go after Mayu you become locked in to that path and can't turn back after a point.
I just wish the "ending" itself made more sense in what happened. One thing I personally do not like is when multiple endings change the story or the personality of the characters in order to create more variety in their endings. I do not want the backstory or the lore and the events of the narrative to suddenly be different from what it was before because I chose to do something that deviates from the canonical story path. Fatal Frame II is one of the few games where that doesn't happen aside from this one part so it just feels inconsistent to me.
I don't think it changes it at all, from what I've read in to the game it lines up fairly reasonably given the circumstances . I honestly think the problem is more that it doesn't mesh with the standards you are holding Mio to. Love doesn't make you incapable of mistakes.
This is derailing in to more of a philosophical debate, so I will probably just have to agree to disgree at this point since I've said my thoughts.
One last thing I will say though is that anyone gthat can think clearly at all times in a village of murderous ghosts next to a pit to Hell is probably not normal.
Edited by Chrysalis, 21 February 2016 - 10:54 PM.
Such order in the midst of chaos makes me woozy and disoriented.