Okay time for my thoughts and observations on the finalists!
Oracle
I honestly think that Oracle has a big heart but struggles with the fact that Survivor is a game where you have to cut people who helped get you further in the game, and doesn't quite know how best to handle that. I have definitely been there so it was something that resonated with me.
I had a very similar experience to Royal and Margot in that Oracle and I would be having conversations about loyalty and transparency and then he'd blindside me. But also after blindsiding me he would go on about how hard it was for him to have made that decision and I'm just sitting there thinking "well how do you think I feel?"
He also got annoyingly passive-aggressive a lot and I just had an incredibly low tolerance for passive-agression or bullshit this game (unless it was me doing it, I'm a flawed human being okay?).
BUT
I really do think that Oracle seriously took on board what Royal said in his announcement post, because I noticed much greater effort from Oracle to be transparent and honest with people after that. And even on a game level, it was part of what made me want to work with him instead of voting him out at the Final 6. Plus despite my complaining here, I actually liked Oracle and I've got to admit that he did have an impressive social game.
I would be hesitant to vote for him because there were a few merge rounds which left a sour taste in my mouth, but I'd still consider it? Especially if he talks about his growth in how he handled difficult conversations over the course of the game, I could say that potentially winning me over.
--
Gustave
Even though I knew that Gustave not-so-secretly wanted me out from Final 9 onwards, I actually liked Gustave the whole way through? Which I think is impressive! Out of the three finalists, my conversations with him felt the most real. He had this way of just making trivial conversation out of nowhere, of topics that he thought would interest both of us, and I loved it!
I know it's been mentioned in the jury forum that Gustave often lacked tact in being too honest with people, which got him into trouble, and I do agree with that, but I personally found the honesty and straightforwardness incredibly comforting. It's also possible that others did not have the same positive social experience with Gustave that I did.
But yeah! I guess I like the fact that someone so honest and straightforward with people managed to make it to the end. I would want to know a bit more about Gustave's gameplay, because obviously there were many moments where it felt like he almost left the game, and I'm not sure what he did to ensure that didn't happen.
--
Richie
Uggghhh, where do I begin?
I truly do believe that Richie was INCREDIBLY enthusiastic to be playing this game, and that I have so much respect for. He really gave it his all, socially, strategically and in challenges. On paper he feels to me like the most fitting winner of this game. But I just can't help but feel conflicted about it?
I believe at least part of his FTC argument will be that he played a loyal game, but how much can you claim a loyal game when your loyalty is on the condition that people do exactly what you want them to?
I would say that I played quite closely with Richie from Final 9 onwards, in some ways by necessity after I accepted his offer of the Team Zissou rings, but I think it's important to consider that this occurred right after he almost successfully blindsided me. Obviously it was my decision to accept the rings, but I think that Richie had this way of asserting what he thought was the best plan in a way that strongly discouraged alternatives. Which could be considered strong gameplay, but when someone did something that he didn't approve of (for example Suzy changing her vote to YW, me&Suzy voting out Margot, probably other examples), he would consider these slights against him and to me would seem genuinely confused as to why (for example) Suzy would make this move against him when he was just being loyal to her.
But then, as Royal mentioned in his announcement post, Richie would keep vital information from and/or lie to even people he considered his closest allies, all while expecting complete honesty from them.
It felt to me as if he legitimately didn't understand how a working relationship in Survivor could occur with an equal power dynamic, or at least without him in the driver's seat.
Richie made a lot of flashy moves, but to me they often seemed unnecessary or even making people uncomfortable. For example, I still don't understand why or how Richie got Royal to change his vote to me at F10. The F5 idol play on Gustave was also pure flex, unsuccessfully (from my perspective) attempting to coerce Gustave into tying the vote for Richie if Richie did not win immunity at F4 (even though Suzy probably would have been an ally for Richie even there). And again seemed like a vindictive move on Suzy... just because?
Those are my complicated thoughts at least. It neglects to mention that I legitimately did enjoy playing with Richie, our conversations were very fun, even if I thought he was overly saccharine in the way he spoke about me (that could just be because I'm old and bitter). I could definitely see myself voting for him if I'm impressed with his FTC performance.
--
So yeah, those are my observations and thoughts and opinions and I'm sure everyone will have differing opinions! I did a lot of complaining here (well except not about Gustave really), but I actually really like all three of the people contending for our votes! I suppose my thought was that if I cannot make my case to win then I will just think EXTRA critically about where to place my vote!
Topic: Madame D. (Read 466 times)
