#pathologic analysis

Throughout the game, Dankovsky doesn't struggle with trivial tasks or executions. He simply plans, orders, draws, and instantly people trip over their feet to work in his stead. He doesn't fight, he orchestrates. Even the two queens with the most influential powers during endgame, still tread carefully around Dankovsky because both the inquisitor and commander see the benefit of keeping such a valuable knight in their corner.

In all three installments of Pathologic, not one character has even come close to the way the inspector disempowers him. Who else could be said to have degraded Dankovsky in a conversation to such extent? The inspector talks down to him in all instances, treating him as an insolant lying child having a tantrum. Not only is he not impressed with Dankovsky's airs and utopian type, but he is downright bored of his pathos. People like Dankovsky are a dime a dozen to the inspector, and they always seem to think they're above the law, that they're special and their dreams are worth all the lives they cost.

The inspector is vital to make you realise the deepshit you've fallen into. Because as a player, no one has ever talked to Dankovsky with such blatant disregard and skepticism before or after, not even Karminsky.

Back in Pathologic Quarantine, people weren't theorising that the inspector is a manifestation of Dankovsky inner guilt-ridden psyche for nothing; the only person who treated the Bachelor with similar disdain has been the Bachelor himself.

He really made the biggest impression on me.

Minus two points because... well, it gets old fast. If you get sent to principle office every two hours, it becomes less daunting than the last time, until you question what were you even afraid of in the first place.

It's especially worse when the player has already become jaded and desensitised to the inspector'a belittling, whilst Dankovsky has not. Suddenly all his replies to the Inspector's insults and skepticism seems melodramatic. He's not overreacting, but it seems this way since the Inspector loses the last specks of intimidation during the fifth or sixth time you talk to him after reseting. In fact, his presence leaned more toward comfortable familiarity to me at that point.

His constant presence undermines his role. However the necessity of said role is so vital to the atmosphere of the story, that it's better with him than without. The sense of impending doom he brings to the table makes P1 Bachelor seem like a walk in the park, mentally speaking, at least no one was breathing down your neck then and demanding a justification for your ever action.

Dankovsky's battles are psychological, at least that's what I think the P3 devs are trying to achieve.

-

Serafima & Platon

10/10

You know what always disheartened me about P1? How lacking in motives the player is. I'm not talking about the protagonists, but the player, you.

Because P1 is a game you have zero motivation to finish or endure, unless you love it... or you're a masochist. It's a test of resilience, so you need a reason to be resilient.

The protagonists have their motives, but only on written paper. You, as a new player have no reason to relate or empathise: You've never seen Thanatica nor know of who else works there. You've never met Isidor Burakh or got to form a connection with the kin to comprehend what exactly you should be afraid of losing. You might be better off homebrewing reasons for why this named protagonist in this town, at least then you'll feel a slight connection to them.

Pathologic 2 is brilliant in the way it integrates the player in Artemy's lore. In the intricate world of the kin, of the steppe, and the town. It shows you exactly what you'll be missing if you sacrifice the other, it lets you form connection to the children bound to you, it makes truly want to come into your role as a healer and prove all those who called you a killer wrong.

Not only that, but you get a resolution!

There was never any resolution for your background motive in P1. You never get to see Thanatica or what became of Dankovsky after his route. You don't get a single new information about the kin or Isidor either after the tower is torn.

So for P2 to not just make the abattoir fight akin to an out of body spiritual experience in this gorey cave dreamlike scape, where you're armed with nothing but a scalpel and meant to draw lines of blood through the cave corridors, be it through fighting, sneaking, or willing sacrifice of others—but also let you talk to Isidor Burakh at the end, Artemy's father, and by virtue of post-fight adrenaline and immense immersion, your father as well. The man who sent you the letter to come back home, the person who left you the inheritance with a puzzle you've been keen on deciphering.

The existence of a rendered Thanatica and its two other doctors were long overdue! Serafima and Platon are nothing short of perfect for the role they play, the reminder of what you left behind, of who you left behind.

They, alongside everything in Capital from the Institution lecture halls and its mesmerising bigger-than-life stained glass murals to the tiny colourful butteflies fluttering about behind glass in the corner of Thanatica's lab, are an incentive.

An incentive to finish the game, to endure the hardships. A reminder of why you CANNOT let the plague escape this town to the capital. A dangling hostage of what you're on the verge of losing if you fail, give up, or take too many risks.

I view them as an extension of what P1 Eva represents, and by shouldering the labour of her role, it frees P3 Eva to become something more than she ever was. She doesn't need to just be your incentive, although she is definitely that too, but something bigger than life as well with her intriguing journey... which I have yet to see said journey. Please tell me P3 actually does something more with her than the 50 amalgam night and day dispenser I've been treating her as.

Both Thanatica, Serafima, Platon, the Capital, and Eva are an incentive to overcome the plague, yes. But that's where their similarities stop.

Because their best role, by far, is representing a crossroad of what's next. You come into the town in order to save your one true love Thanatica, but in doing so, you stumble upon another beautiful miracle, the Polyhedron and Eva. And now you must choose.

You're too busy battling the plague and escaping death, that you don't see this crossroad coming until you slam face first into it and realise the ditch you've digged yourself into. I think that's beautiful.

For Artemy, P2 is homecoming. This town is his home, where he'll live from now on. It's in his best interest to stitch as many of the wounds as possible and clean the place up. So you make permanent everlasting choices. You tackle deepseated issue. You venture beneath the surface of the earth and look at the biggest problem of all, the source of it all, the punctured heart.

While for Daniil, it's the other way around, he's trying to get back home to his Thanatica but this town won't let him go. So no wonder his solutions are preventive and temporary nicotine patches. He's not here to heal or cure, he's here to prevent and endure. Outlast the plague and hopefully take a trophy home to revive his lab. Dankovsky's here to conquere the beast town, while Artemy's seeks to nurture it. He cannot see the plague for the cry for help that it is, only the monster that's in his path. He doesn't respect the earth or care for the rippling affects of his actions, why should he? He's not here for long to face the consequences.

As for what I think about Serafima and Platon alone as characters, it's still inconclusive; haven't seen much of them. I don't know if the game will show more, either. They aren't meant to be fully flushed out characters like the town bounds. They're more intended to be extensions of Dankovsky that compliment him beautifully. A clear synergy between the three of them: one measures up where the other two are lacking

Ha. Three. Things always come in three. Three ruling families, three Mistresses, three factions, three healers, and three doctors at Thanatica. Even the plague comes on the third day.

-

Mark Karminsky

As early as P1, Inquisitor Aglaya Lilich was well established to be a radical amongst radicals. She's archaic by Inquisitor standards, and solves problems with minimum casualties.

It's funny really, I clearly remember those npcs in P1 calling her a bitch as they hunted her across town, thinking they'd kill her. Now with Karminsky as a point of reference, I wonder if those same npcs would get the chance to crawl back, begging for Aglaya after realising the undeserved leniency she's treated them with, or would bloodloss spell their demise before reaching her feet after Karminsky cuts off their tongues at the first sign of a disrespectful syllable.

Aglaya sets a gallows that she scarcely uses beyond the first cutscene in P1. The only other time she takes a live is in the Bachelor route where she orders a rebellious executor to jump off the Cathedral.

In P2, she does neither. The only corpse that hangs in her gallows is due to suicide. Why did Veronica Croy kill herself? Because she was scared. Of who? Her inquisitor father Peter Croy.

She wanted to escape, and her only form of escape was suicide.

She was studying to be a doctor, she attended the same institution Dankovsky taught at.

Aglaya Lilich is a saint amongst inquisitors. But it was only ever said, written, told, never shown.

Until: enter Mark Karminsky, the vampire inquisitor.

He was drummed up so much in P1. For Georgiy Kain to warn you about someone? The same guy who preached unbiases so the Bachelor may form his own opinions to honour Simon's memory?

And oh, he did not disappoint.

First hour after arrival, he immediately starts cleaning house. Gets down to who the important responsibile people are, and sends them calling cards in the shape of two armed guards to drag them into the Cathedral, willing or not.

But unlike Aglaya, who in P1 made them wait in line so each one may get a private 1 on 1 trial with her, Karminsky groups them together like sheep to the slaughter. He lines them up. He fucking lines them up like a gym teacher during dodge ball

He's not just throwing his weight around, he's blatantly rubbing his authority in their faces. They're nothing, less than the dirt under his boots.

They're not even human to him, he strips them of all the usual respect, privacy, and privileges they've take for granted all their lives. They don't get a private trial, they don't get a chair to sit on, and they most definitely don't get to speak unless they're spoken to.

He starts from left to right, like it's a steak he's digging into and not people he's deciding the fate of. One of the firsts to sink his fangs into? Artemy Burakh, the strongest looking hulk of a man in this entire room.

Now Burakh's gift is that he won't play your game, no matter what. It's what makes him infuriatingly immune to manipulation. You could tear your hair out attempting to sway him one way or the other, Artemy is stubborn as a bull and will only follow his heart.

He doesn't blame Aglaya for using Dankovsky in P1 to execute her revenge on the Kains, he blames Dankovsky. He says so to his face. Burakh tells him that it was his fault for holding the inquisitor up to the expectations of being a saint, then acting betrayed when she didn't meet those set of expectations you imposed on her.

That the Bachelor is responsible for his actions. He chose to trust her and aid in her cause, and true to her words she only promised a way to end the epidemic. If he feels betrayed that she seeked out personal vengeance in the meantime or didn't save the things he expected her to, then he's to blame for it, not her.

A cleancut no-bullshit mindset like that prevents Artemy from being intimidated by Karminsky. He doesn't care, literally. Doesn't matter what he'll say or do, the inquisitor will do whatever he likes, so there's no point in arguing with someone like him. He outright refuses to play his game.

The sole thing that saves him from hanging? Dankovsky's promise to vouch for him. By sheer fucking luck, or maybe menkhu intuition, Artemy knew it's good to have the Bachelor owe him a favour or two.

Next on the chopping block, Peter Stamatin.

I want you to stop and think for a moment, in what world would Andrey fucking Stamatin let his sensitive fragile twin (whom he constantly infantlises) walk into inquisiton custody without him?

As if.

In P2 Andrey was right there glued to Peter's side, standing in the line awaiting Lilich's trial.

What Karminsky has done is nothing short of forcibly ripping conjoined twins from each other. In less than an hour, he not only got a good read on the Stamatins to comprehend the codependent relationship they share, but to foresee the vulnerabilities and fractures in it, and take advantage of it.

He needed Peter, the pliant apathetic one. Needed someone who is meak and weak, who will surrender to circumstances and fold like a deck of cards. Sleep deprivation is a real tactic used to weaken the mind, Karminsky purposely wanted him ripped from his bedsheets first thing in the early morning.

But why go through all of this for such a weak prey? Isn't this supposed to be a show of power? It doesn't exactly add much to his credibility to take advantage of Peter, it's a feat even a child is capable of.

Because, Artemy's trial was the show of prowess. Peter's trial is a show of ruthlessness.

Karminsky wasn't showcasing his formidable abilities on Peter, but his lack of mercy, his drywell of morals. That even the most pathetic and apathetic recent-suicide-survivor addict won't be shown a speck of decorum in this blood feast.

He was toying with Peter like a cat would a wounded roach. He was ripping his wings off one by one, mutilating the scales with his claws. And when he grew bored of him, Peter's execution commenced at dusk.

He didn't even bother meeting Andrey, not giving him the chance to defend his twin. While Peter was amusing to abuse and kick around, Andrey was treated as a bore, as nothing. Even less than a bug. An unremarkable ordinary schmuck worthy of neither torment nor conversing.

All of this, with everyone watching.

Mark Karminsky didn't set up an lawful court of justice in the Cathedral, but a deviant powerplay exhibition. Forced everyone he deemed a little interesting to participate in it. To submit, stand silenced, and observe him tear into the herd of sheep one by one, basking in the bloodlust.

the first people lining up were akin to appetisers before his real supper

The most gut wrenching conversation I've read in a Pathologic game.

Let me reiterate, inquisitors have no regards for either kids or families. Even the least trigger happy such as Lilich, hold no remorse for the children Artemy would be leaving behind. Croy groomed his daughter from an early age to become an inquisitor, and that childhood left her traumatised so much so even the mere possibility of seeing him again is enough to get her to hang herself to death in the open gallows.

In a handful of sentences, laced with implicit accusations of dire consequences, inquisitor Mark Karminsky gets the noble and dignified esteemed ruler of this town, Governor Alexander of the Saburov dynasty, to disown his daughter on record. The orphaned little girl the Saburovs took in after years of failed conception attempts.

Katerina locks her door.

For the first time in the game, if you visit the Rod, on this day, after this conversation, you find the door to Katerina's bedroom locked.

He took her daughter away, he took her only child away. Her husband. Her loving and ever so loyal dutiful husband, disowned the one child who is more her daughter than her very own progeny could've ever been.

It would've been more merciful to make Saburov pluck out his eyes and swallow them. It would've been more humane to ask him to gut his own stomach out.

She called him "Dad" but do you know what she calls Katerina?

"Mama"

Not "mom" not just a mom, not a mother. But Mama, mama. The first words of every child, mama. Mama.

Could you imagine being in Katerina's shoes? Being raised on the principle that being a mother is her sole purpose in life, and then failing at that said purpose. Despite your many attempts and efforts, you remain barren. People start speculating nasty things about you, that you eat your own kids, that you're cursed, that your husband never loved you.

You spiral into insanity, you wither like a rotten rose, scratch at walls, whisper to rats, drown your pain in morphine. Become addicted to a debilitating degree, it feels like shards of glass are cutting your veins inside out if you go a week without a vial.

And then, by some miracle, you stumble upon a little girl who reminds you so much of yourself. Who, without any incentive from you, crowns you with the title of Mama.

That word you thought you'd never hear, to have it coldly ripped from you by a crimson-eyed inquisitor who twisted your husband's arm into submission.

Mark Karminsky, is not evil. For the word evil is too good for him.

And I absolutely love him, his role is immaculate. A horrific work of art. A truly despicable bloodsucking demon from the razed bowels of hell.

He paints a most vivid picture of what the rest of the Inquisition is like. Of what exactly sets Aglaya Lilich apart from her peers; her lack of heart. She is pure mathematical formulas, devoid of life and love. She is a creepy steel-hearted cunning inquisitor, but not a demon.

-

In general, I'm appreciating the new characters more and more. Because they help shape the world of Pathologic better. I love the town and the bounds, but they've been tried to death and back. I know more about the contents of Stainslav Rubin's sock drawer than what's the ruling government system in Pathologic world is like. Who are the other indigenous tribes living in the steppe seperate from the Kin with their own traditions and mythology? Why were the Olgimskys bribing the government for before? Are the Saburovs still shareholders in the bull project? What do the Stamatins other projects look like? Can I please see House House?

Although, I admit, that's how it's always been. To expand upon needless details of worldbuilding is disingenuous to what Pathologic is built upon, P1 at the very least. The writing is theatrical on purpose; it's not supposed to be realistic! You should be immersied in the drama and stakes, not by the world being a convincing replica of our real world.

The town npcs are a greek chorus, a many headed hydra meant to set the ambiance and only tell you what's relevant to you. They're not supposed to have names or moods or dreams. The world should only change in reaction to your input or to move the plot.

Mystique needs to be maintained to pinpoint the lights on the main actors instead. Serafima and Platon shouldn't get more humanised because they'd be overstepping their roles as actors in a play. Tutorial characters like the Cathedral Caretaker should not be acknowledged by the bounds, that's like them acknowledging the P2 pantomimes handing you bread in the street.

I won't lie, a lot of things in P3 steer away from what set P1 aside from other games. It's less unique. It's more simplified, as if the dialogue is too insecure to monologue at you in long complex intricate sentances that require a couple rereads and a pocket dictionary to decipher, so it retorts to watering down the daunting poetry and philosophy by being witty and sarcastic... too much at times.

It's entertaining, it's still pathologic, but... it feels off. It's too easy, I feel like it has to be said.

There is no pressure to survive, but it's on purpose with the devs vision since the Bachelor's struggle is psychological and not physical like the Haruspex. Sure, whatever. Gosh darn it I hate the mind vs body duality, they don't exist in a vacuum but sure.

There is no pressure, at all. I don't feel any psychological pressure. The town is thriving. I'm killing the shabnak everyday and the infection is plummeting. This is my first playthrough, blind and guideless. I'm breezing by. Diagnosing paitents is so much easier than extracting organs and brewing tinctures in P2. God do you remember how exhusating and time draining that was? How on top of it all, you still have a set chance to fail even if you did everything right? How you never had the time to do everything so you had to focus on the organs you actually need?

Well, in P3, I have plenty of time, and plenty of fail-safe methods. There were permanent consequences to dying in P2, but in P3 they're all... temporary? You can fix it at the Cathedral, or by collecting Amalgam which there is a shit ton of, everywhere.

You can even farm it endlessly by repeating old quests with amalgam rewards.

There should be consequences for rewinding a day more than twice, there should be some sort of limited missable things you can't take back.

Like I'm enjoying the game and I'm ever so grateful for the studio. It's visually stunning and the music is phenomenal. I love getting to see all these characters again.

But a crucial Pathologic element is clearly missing.

Daniil’s many failures and the unforeseen consequences of his actions, map quite closely onto the deceit of Baldur’s blind brother Hodr. Through Daniil’s interference in the running of the town, the outbreak doesn’t get better. The “solutions” he tries to give the townspeople only cause the death and destruction of the sand pest to grow worse over time. Like in many myths, Loki is not capable of the great acts of violence gods like Thor are, but it’s his words which wreak havoc. His inability to safe guard the towns drinking water supply, his brutal quarantine measures, his failed vaccine, his failures and their consequences only continued to pile up. Like Daniil said himself, he was not running around the streets shooting people all 12 days like the rumours said. But is commanding the town to lock the sick in their homes to die alone any less brutal of a killing blow?

But ultimately, the crime he is most likely to be remembered for is one of horrifying brutality. Not just that, but brutality treated like a game. Brutality done for something no one could truly argue is worth the life that was taken.

A holly arrow shot through Baldur’s heart, a bullet which killed a messenger who was simply delivering papers.

Why? Ultimately in the end, the motive feels meaningless. Envy or a desire to study a strange tower. Neither of them matter, both actions still feel like a pivotal moment in their respective stories. A marker of how far each character’s morality has slipped silently in the background.

Is the judge of their actions themselves innocent? Ha! No! Laughably far from it. But a death is a death. It is poignant that this time Daniil took the weapon into his own hands, while Loki on the other hand is not the one holding the bow his guilt is no more obscured.

So both the mythological Loki and Daniil Dankovsky end their story facing a lifetime of punishment stretching out before them. For this murder and for the crimes and cunning which defined them beforehand.

Will Eva be the Sigyn figure for him? Easing his suffering? Catching the snake’s venom in a bowl before it hits Daniil’s eyes? That depends on Artemy’s actions, if he was able to save her in this version of the story. That is, if it really matters at all.

Maybe it doesn’t. After all, there is another serpent in this story. And Eva has her own compelling mythological analogue.

Then, does Daniil become both the punished and the punishment? I don’t think so. If there’s one thing we know about the characters in the world of Pathologic it’s that they look different from every angle. Ultimately this is just one direction his story can go from one point of view. Is he a victor or a villain? A trickster, deceiver or a hero? A murderer or a healer? He seems one way from this angle, but will surely look completely different through his own eyes in a few short days.

I look forward to playing Pathologic 3 alongside you all. Thank you for reading my analysis!

I wrote down four statements that describe my general feelings about the demo. They will serve as a frame of reference for what my critique will fundamentally touch upon instead of trying to fit every possible complaint I might have in a disjointed fashion. Here they are:

I feel like Quarantine expects me to:

Consider Dankovsky to be a specific Character in a specific Story

Believe Dankovsky has an internal world that can be mechanically represented in the ludo-narrative

Find said internal world to be compelling enough to let it filter the whole experience of the game

(presumably) emotionally connect with Dankovsky due to all of the above

If all this sounds confusing - good! Keep reading, it's going to get even better.

So, is Daniil a character?

Yes, of course he is. But what does it mean in the context of the original game compared to Pathologic 2 and now Quarantine?

Over the years I've come across vastly different opinions about the quality of character writing in the original Pathologic. I am not including complaints about the English translations or other technical aspects, just the most basic tendency of how the game portrays its characters. Most people I've seen who have passionately engaged with the game (including me) tend to describe the original game's characterizations as nuanced, complex and strangely realistic despite their rather theatrical tendencies. But I've also heard others say the exact opposite. That the characters don't feel like real people at all, their personalities are incoherent and fall flat due to a lack of consistency, and that every single one of them, from an old man to a literal toddler, falls back on the same pseudo-philosophical cadence, which while attempting to make them seem deeper ends up dehumanizing them even further. And even though those two opinions seem to be contradictory, I think that they are both the exact same reason why the writing of the original game captivates me so much. Because it doesn't really matter.

I wrote my thesis about the brechtian influences in Classic. One of the most characteristic aspects of the Epic Theatre is the attempt to remove illusions typical to traditional theatre, among which is the illusion of a character's psychology. I believe that you can absolutely argue that the characters in patho 1 were designed to behave like Brecht's characters - lacking internal psychology, mainly serving as mouthpieces for political and philosophical arguments, more so types than individuals. But here's the catch - I believe it's actually impossible to create a character completely immune to identification, because we as humans love to project our silly little emotions on pretty much anything, including animals and inanimate objects. Compared to those cases, Gorkhon's gallery of strange individuals is a painfully human display. So it's no wonder that many of us did indeed relate to those weirdos, just like nothing can possibly stop an audience member from identifying with Mother Courage or Galileo in Brecht's play. But the fact still remains that none of those characters were designed with this kind of simple emotional identification in mind and thus the attachment we may feel to them is more of a byproduct than the main goal. Taking a character who was meant to be analytically pondered and instead adopting them as a breathing human being is in that case, almost an act of rebellion. It's like saying, this is mine now.

Coming back to Daniil, this lack of clarity of how much he was written with this sort of characterization in mind is the main reason why I found him so compelling, he always kept me asking: is this part of Daniil as a coherent whole or is it just a philosophical stance which I should ponder at this moment or is it the writer's attempt at predicting what the player (presumably a straight male player) may want to say through this character? Does Daniil say "wow" because that's how he speaks, or is it just an oversight? Am I supposed to treat optional dialogue as things he would say or just things that are sometimes said in his world? The point is I DON'T KNOW and I love that I don't know that! It gives me so many posibilities! To me Daniil's character isn't so much about what he exactly says or does, but rather the internal logic that guides him. And I am the one who can choose its exact mechanism. He is mine.

Meanwhile, I feel like Quarantine wants me to treat Dankovsky like I would treat most other characters in traditional/popular media. Here are his personality traits. He is intelligent, he says so himself, and that lady over there also said it and he knows science and formulas and speaks Latin. Here are his thoughts. He has a memory about this thing. He feels guilty about that. I suddenly have a whole army of simple sentences that are meant to help me umderstand Daniil in this new iteration. Not so much a puzzle but a construction manual. And I'm not saying that this way of storytelling is fundamentally bad just because I can parody it as simpler than it really is. I want to engage with the new game's writing on it's own terms but so far I haven't done that mostly due to the giant dankovsky shaped object blocking the view.

Speaking of-

THE BACHELOR-CENTRIC MODEL OF THE UNIVERSE

This demo is so much about Dankovsky that it almost makes me embarrassed in his name. And honestly, I'm surprised I feel that way, considering how much I usually enjoy stories where a character's perception shapes the narrative to a great extent. I love symbolic dream sequences, guilt-driven visions and unreliable narrators. But the way Daniil's perception of himself and his surroundings doesn't really feel like a service to him as a character, but rather a narrative shorthand to spoonfeed me, the player, the most relevant information. The way Daniil's thoughts appear around objects is realistic to the extent that yes, human thoughts can be often rather simple and disjointed but there are moments where I think this mental streamlining is detrimental to his characterization and rubs him of nuance. The worst culprits of that are (IN MY OPINION):

Him calling Eva a ray of sunshine

The part where he references the fact that he and Artemy always fight about whose methods are better

Any time Daniil or someone around him refers to him as especially intelligent

Mr Little's Special Tutorial Perspective or Please Daniil Explain This To Me Once Again

None of those ideas are fundamentally bad, not at all. I'm curious to see his relationship with Eva develop, I want to see him interact with Artemy more like they did in the original, I can see some great ironic potential in the constant hyping up of Daniil's intellect and yeah, I hope Yakov is revealed to be some secret government agent or something. But I'm annoyed that I feel like I can predict all of this from just a couple of lines in the demo. I want to be confused and unsure of my own judgement. I want to be proven wrong, surprised, and ashamed of my own surface level analysis. And that can still very much happen, perhaps even in the comments on this very post or once the full games comes out. But right now I feel rather pessimistic.

I don't have a good segue for this part so now let's talk mechanics.

PRESS B TO EAT A CIGARRETE

The new mechanics try to break away from the body-first focus of the original game and the way Pathologic 2 expanded on those ideas even further. This time it's all about the mind, baby. Which - again - on itself isn't a bad idea. If this game was just 2 with different dialogues it would be very hard to justify its existence as a stand-alone product that needed to somehow be funded over those last 6 years. But the result to me feels more like novelty for novelty's sake. Not everything of course - the diagnosis part of the gameplay is definitely its most well-designed aspect, and there is a consistent logic behind it. Where Artemy saw systems, Daniils sees individual parts, where Artemy had to rely on luck, Daniil controls all the variables etc etc. The same, however, cannot be said about some of the other new mechanics.

Managing Daniil's mental state doesn't feel that much different than making sure Artemy drinks enough water and I personally think it's a wasted opportunity. I'm not going to insert myself into the discussion about whether the game's use of terms associated with bipolar disorder is accurate/tasteful because other people with relevant experiences have already voiced their opinions about that and will hopefully continue to do so in the future. My point is - regardless of what exact mental condition or more general function of the human psyche the game is trying to convey, it does so in a manner so simplistic that it doesn't encourage me as a player to connect with it on a deeper level. Apathy is blue because it's sad, Mania means, well, mania so it's red. Once again, I have only experienced a small portion of the game's final system so I might be in for a surprise and perhaps I will get to see Daniil experience something... purple?

Also adding to my previous point about switching perspectives - I think this mechanic will be an absolute gut punch in the final game. I hope it's something akin to the original meeting with the Powers That Be, especially with the way multiple characters can "jump" into one conversation at any moment. This will surely be utilized for some mind-fuckery and I can't wait to see it. I think this is also the one aspect of the demo that gives me the most hope as far as my beloved emotional confusion is concerned. Because what is the switching of perspectives supposed to indicate really? Are we supposed to filter it once again through Daniil's perspective because of the framing device of him recollecting the events? So nothing we learn by getting the insight into other characters' thoughts can be taken at face value because that's just how Daniil sees them? Are those other/new characters even real or just exist in Daniil's psyche? Does it have something to do with the time travel blahblah? Or are we not playing as Daniil at all but some other entity entirely? That's the main question I hope I don't get a clear answer to but rather contradicting paths to follow. But despite that optimistic outlook I still need to get into the final aspect that made it difficult for me to engage with the new game on its own terms, and instead deciding to take its dead corpse apart.

I CARE TOO MUCH BUT NOT ENOUGH

I just can't get over the fact how much this game wants me to identify with Daniil or at the very least find him cool. Cool as in how modern characters are often cool. Wet cats, chaotic bastards, jerks with hearts of gold and vaguely homoerotic energy with other male characters. And I'm not saying this as an insult, narrative trends are a thing, I find many of those archetypes to be endearing more often than not, but my problem is that it still only serves Dankovsky as our center of the world. By flanderizing him and making him fit into a more recognizable character archetype we lose the feeling of him being always at odds with the world around him, the way he used to be conflicted over every single thing in the original game. This new world is too suited for him to be a hero of his story, a tragic hero but a hero nonetheless, while in my opinion what made him uniquely tragic in classic was precisely the fact that he wasn't anyone's hero.

I know this constant comparison to patho classic can get tiring, so let me use another point of reference which is also the reason why I am even writing this post in the first place - The Marble Nest. I love the marble nest. I find its narrative structure to be expertly crafted, emotional beats placed in just the right places and godd i still cry over the fact that they put his soul into a nutshell. And the funny thing is that TMN does share a lot of similarities with the new demo. It's a Daniil-centric story with a framing device that encourages us to look at the entire experience as Daniil's impression of the reality around him. It's a short and rather simple experience with a strong central theme. So why do I feel so emotional when Daniil talks to the death in that game but feel pretty much nothing when he talk about dying in Quarantine? Maybe because The Marble Nest is still steeped so deeply in the theatre influences which I hold dear to my heart while Quarantine moves away from them and maybe towards another medium entirely. Theatre never pretends to be reality and it's artificiality is always front and center. Film meanwhile often has the tendency to try to replicate reality or even try to be reality itself. In one of those cases I feel like an active audience member and in the other like a passive voyeur of some vision of reality. Or to put it simply, in one case I am afraid of Death and in the other, I am watching someone act out being afraid of death. That is a highly personal preference though and I'm genuinely happy to see that many people do indeed relate to this portrayal of Daniil, especially when it comes to how his mental problems are displayed front and center. And that's amazing! I want to see all the fan input that comes out of it and I hope the final game delivers on everything they hope for. But for me? I think I might need to take a back seat, at least for now. Watch the scene from afar, perhaps get a fuller picture. Because I want to care and understand and know and feel. I really do. But sometimes it's not possible and that's also good.

So, if you've read this overwritten mess to the end, I want to thank you from the bottom of my heart and encourage you to voice your opinion. Art doesn't exist without discussion so let's discuss!

POST-SCRIPTUM - ON THE NATURE OF MAKING GOOD THINGS IN YOUR PAST

One last thing I wanted to add which feels highly relevant to the my critique is the question of what to do when someone says they liked your old work better? I like to think of myself as an artist and I think that many of us do, even without getting into how according to Beuys everyone is an artist. So you make a thing, some people like, perhaps many people do. So you keep making things, you grow with them, change, realize your old ideas were often childish or naive which you can only do through gaining experience. So you make new things, often drastically different from the ones you made before. And someone says "I liked the old stuff better". And they don't say it as an insult, even though it may sometimes feel like it. Because you cannot recreate whatever you did in your past. And you want to grow. Does that mean that you got worse instead? That you peaked in your past and it's all downhill from here? Of course not. You know that. I know that. I hope every artist knows that. And yet it still hurts. It hurts to be perceived as a line graph when in reality you are a recursive function.

----

Daniil brings up his family in passing what? A handful of times? He has a family back in the capital somewhere, but he’s clearly an independent, high achieving young adult without the strongest ties to them. His personality makes it feel as though he’s been determined to handle his business on his own for a long time, judging by how quickly he steps up to take control of the town and how proud he is of his own personal achievements disconnected from anyone else.

On top of that he expresses a desire to not get married (he’s married to his work and all that). He’s just not that much of a family oriented person. Even if I do enjoy what I’ve heard of his interactions with the towns kids, to me his character stands in contrast to the close knit families and noble dynasties of the town. The other people in power in the town are that way because of their influential families, each bears their family name like a badge of honour. Then we have Mr. Daniil D. Dankovsky here whose name seems to almost symbolize him standing on his own, no ties to any name but his own. (Thank you little children playing your game with these characters, fantastic naming scheme 10/10) His disconnect from a recognizable family name also reinforces his place as a mostly unwanted outsider in the town.

And of course, gotta make a quick mention of popular fanon real quick. The very popular “fix Daniil’s life au” where he and Artemy raise Sticky and Murky together is just extra heart warming considering how separated from family Daniil is within the games. I’d say he seems pretty good with kids, but he’s focusing so much of his energy into a career we know he’s unfortunately destined to lose all progress on in the end that it leaves you wondering “What will be important to him after the loss of Thanatica?” And honestly I think “Maybe he’ll finally realize how fulfilling building family bonds can be.” Is a beautiful answer to that.

Then we got Clara. Clara shows up in the town notably missing a family. She’s a little girl all alone, stealing to survive because she has no one. Well, I suppose that mental image would be a whole lot more uniquely sad if we weren’t in the Town on Gorkhon where every second kids parents died of the plague a few years back. But unlike Daniil, I believe Clara having no biological parents actually connects her more to the town instead of just not having a strong connection to the parents one does have. Clara is a outcasted character in the beginning, she isn’t expected to have any strong family bonds, so she kind of fits into the crowd of orphaned children. She’s also more directly a child of the earth than others, which I guess ties her more to other miracles of the steppe then the town, but hey at least people like her are known of within the town.

But there is a position empty in the town, a vital role which must be filled, the third young mistress, someone to inherit Katerina’s position. Clara was implied to be created for a purpose, but overrode that purpose in many ways, by being a force of healing in the town yes, but also perhaps by seeking out a family she was not born into and taking on a responsibility for the town from there.

To me Clara’s adoption and how quickly she grows to care for her adoptive parents is very beautiful. As her mysteries are pealed back so is her perceived lack of humanity. She needs a family just like anyone else. It makes me wonder about the other kinds of people said to be formed of clay, if any of them ended up seeking out family dynamics of their own? Sorry if my understanding of her lore is a bit wonky, at this point I’m kinda theorizing off of lore crumbs lol.

Now time for the big finale of this analysis, the man who embodies this theme more than any other character, Artemy. As I mentioned in a previous post, Artemy’s relationship to the theme of family is one of the most compelling parts of patho 2 to me. Although I’ll be focusing less on his kids today as opposed to that post.

Completely unlike the other two healers, Artemy is connected to the town primarily by family ties. He’s Isidor’s boy, even if some npcs seem to not remember which son he is. To Artemy his last name is that badge of honour, that ticket to relevance as an authority figure that we see in the ruling families as well. To others he tends to simply introduce himself as Burakh, Burakh the local healer, sounds about right to them so he gets through situations quicker. Even after all three of his close family members are dead and buried his family connections still help him throughout the game. Trust, authority, familiarity. His name grants him all of these.

He is a menkhu, a title he inherited through blood connection, although proving himself is still an important aspect of being granted that title. His place as a spiritual leader among The Kin connects him to presumably countless generations of his ancestors. I’d be remiss not to mention the implications of the actual exonym The Kin (to be perfectly honest I’m not sure if Khatanghe literally means the same thing as “The Kin” in their language but I’m gonna assume it does because of its similarity to other family-related words in the language). A side effect of the cultural perception of the entire community as a family in The Kin is Artemy’s family circle being expanded greatly. Even before the passing of his father he had The Kin, his kin, in a literal sense too. Whereas the town seems to emanate this somewhat hostile, individualistic single family household kind of culture. Families feud with each other, what’s good for one family is prioritized over the good of the whole. But Artemy grew up partly within a cultural context where those barriers don’t separate people quite as much.

Of course, Artemy is not descended just from the people of The Kin, and that is a very deliberate choice. Artemy never knew his mother yes, but he grew up in the town likely because of her influence on the family. He is his mother’s son, he is a member of a friend group of townspeople, he is just as tied to the community of the town as he is to The Kin. In my interpretation since he grew up alongside Grief, Lara and Rubin he might as well be their pseudo-sibling.

All these family connections further complicate the difficult decision at the end of patho 2. In a way the game is asking you to choose one family over the other. When viewing the stories conclusion through this lense Sticky and Murky being your actual adoptive children becomes the least relevant of any family connection funnily enough. They’ll be there at your side regardless, but they also aren’t your only family.

Although like many members of the fandom I agree the diurnal ending, saving the children you were meant to protect, preserving the town’s future, keeping the livelihoods of all the people you’re closest to intact, is the more fulfilling ending, I can see the appeal of the nocturnal ending as well. Artemy balances far too many responsibilities, family ties, and deep bonds for it to be an easy choice. But surprise surprise, the devs said it best: his is a story about love. I think the games exploration of the impossible choices love sometimes leaves us to make is phenomenally compelling. And in a way, I believe Artemy is the only person who truly knows the town and The Kin well enough to be left in charge of that choice, he is a child of both worlds. That’s why I believe family bonds and connection to place is so intimately linked in Pathologic. Artemy is undoubtedly at the heart of this theme, not because his individual connections are stronger then anyone else’s, but because each bond of family pulls him in a different direction, and it’s your decision which ones must be discarded and which ones must be saved.