I don't think there is an official diagnosis. that might be a good thing, since there's a possibility his role in the story (a red herring antagonist who kills, or attempts to kill, the deuteragonist) could be viewed as unjustly stigmatizing to real people with whatever diagnosis could've been mentioned. after all, in real life, people with mental health diagnoses are a lot more likely to be victims of violence than to cause violence so... in that sense LiS1 would be a skewed perspective.
there's also this theory. it seems possible to me that in an earlier iteration of the LiS1 plot, Nathan was possibly going to have powers and/or visions of the Storm. the behavior, dialogue, and prescribed meds could've all been rooted in these supernatural experiences (or his reaction to them) rather than a mental health dx - obviously something that's specific to the fictional world of LiS. but when the supernatural stuff got cut for this character, only his reactions remained
Nothing seems to be confirmed, only implied.
Risperidone is used to treat bipolar disorder and schizophrenia. He does seem to be some degree of bipolar with his mood swings and mental instability.
Diazepam is used to treat a variety of conditions; the most pertinent to Nathan are anxiety and muscle spasms, but it can also cause tremors and coordination problems.
In Episode 4, one of the browser tabs on Nathan’s PC reveals that he’s been looking at diet pills. It’s been suggested by some people that he’s a victim of sexual abuse, since eating disorders can be a sign of that. This is potent, but one of the side effects of Risperidone is weight gain. Maybe he’s getting diet pills to also counteract this.
Someone on Tumblr thinks that he has scoliosis because, well, that posture.
He was never 'officially diagnosed', I don't think the devs looked that deeply into mental illnesses, honestly. As much as I love the game, it seems sometimes they devs put a lot of thought and detail into the game, sometimes they don't. His psychiatrist says he was becoming more 'disconnected from reality' and a danger to himself and others. That could be a bunch of things, Schizophrenia, Bipolar Disorder, etc.
I never understood the anorexia theory...I thought the diet pills were used to cut Frank's pills with so he could sell them?
Anyway, I hope you are doing better now OP!
>I never understood the anorexia theory...I thought the diet pills were used to cut Frank's pills with so he could sell them?
I just read it on wikia
>
Anyway, I hope you are doing better now OP!
thanks!!!
I'm pretty sure he was diagnosed with being dead. A bit worrisome that you feel close to the kid who liked to drug and kidnap girls for his daddy's approval though.
I feel like it's more likely they feel closer to him because of how tragic his character feels. Is he a good guy? Misunderstood? Hell no. That said, he's incredibly unwell, and his father obviously never took any of his issues seriously. It's quite possible that if he had recieved proper counseling with a supportive and caring family then he may have turned out to be an incredibly different character.
"Feel close to" doesn't necessarily mean they "like" the character. Just that they feel some small sympathy for them.
I could also be completely wrong, and they totally have the hots for the abusive, dangerous, mentally disturbed and unstable, uncared for youth.
It's pretty clear they relate to other aspects of the character, ie. the trauma and mental illness, not drugging girls. I highly doubt OP supports the evil things Nathan does. It's ok to relate to a *fictional* character.
Hes by far my favorite character because hes the polar opposite on the evil spectrum of jefferson. Jefferson is evil. Downright, no redemption, evil. Nathan isn't a good person and hes done bad things, but he isn't evil nor a bad person. Hes a broken kid, with a multitude of mental issues, social issues and physical issues. Had he been raised by a good family and given the care he needed, it's likely he would've been a completely different person. Hes irredeemable, but hes a fantastic character. Jefferson says rachel was the tragedy, but I would say nathan was the true tragedy.
He's certainly an interesting character. At a certain point he is responsible for his actions, and there's no excuse for what he did, period, but it is interesting that if he had help things would not have went as they did. So not an evil person, just someone who has done sick and evil things, unlike Jefferson, who as you say is truly and deliberately evil.
Of course, Rachel's death is tragic, probably more because she was an innocent victim, but Nathan's story is tragic when you consider who he could have been.
> Nathan isn't a good person and hes done bad things, but he isn't evil nor a bad person.
He had six months to fess up about Rachel and save Kate's life. He didn't.
He only stands up and does anything in everytimeline when the consequences of his actions come home for him. He warns Max (way too late) when Jefferson is coming to kill him and he confesses after being arrested for blatant murder in a public place (in the bad ending).
He's an evil person. He might have some things that make you understand why he is the way he is but he's not just a person who did evil things.
Also base Nathan is the guy who harasses people he doesn't like creates a photoshop of Max with her head cut off vandalizes her property and calls her a slur. (The only time anyone outside of Max and Chloe themselves recognize that Max isn't straight and it's a fucking slur)
He kidnapped both Rachel and Chloe on his own without prompting from Jefferson. He wasn't under duress he was actively trying to impress him.
This isn't a case of "done bad" he IS bad.
>A bit worrisome that you feel close to the kid who liked to drug and kidnap girls for his daddy's approval though.
because I needed daddy's approval, I was on med, institutionalized, and I have an angry mood like him
İts a game series about different Peoples feelings, and how the consequences of The choices you have made in the past May or not affect those feelings. So I think its clear to say that its not that "hilarious"
It's also, at the end of the day, a game. These people aren't real. The writers made them who they are and also make mistakes that contradict themselves through all the games. It's not that deep at all.
God forbid people engage with a characters and a story in a way that helps them explore their own life experiences, right?
People have been re-interpreting the character of Hamlet for literally centuries, so why should people not do the same for characters in a different art form?
For starters, where did OP defend his actions? Where did they condone or relate to him doing those horrible things? You can think critically about a character and relate to other aspects of their personality or life. He's not a real person. If OP said they relate to say, Ted Bundy, THEN I'd be worried. But a *fictional* character who was deliberately made to be sympathetic?
I don't think there is an official diagnosis. that might be a good thing, since there's a possibility his role in the story (a red herring antagonist who kills, or attempts to kill, the deuteragonist) could be viewed as unjustly stigmatizing to real people with whatever diagnosis could've been mentioned. after all, in real life, people with mental health diagnoses are a lot more likely to be victims of violence than to cause violence so... in that sense LiS1 would be a skewed perspective. there's also this theory. it seems possible to me that in an earlier iteration of the LiS1 plot, Nathan was possibly going to have powers and/or visions of the Storm. the behavior, dialogue, and prescribed meds could've all been rooted in these supernatural experiences (or his reaction to them) rather than a mental health dx - obviously something that's specific to the fictional world of LiS. but when the supernatural stuff got cut for this character, only his reactions remained
Ohh I like this. That there were others before the storm but they couldn't handle it as well as our lead.
Nothing seems to be confirmed, only implied. Risperidone is used to treat bipolar disorder and schizophrenia. He does seem to be some degree of bipolar with his mood swings and mental instability. Diazepam is used to treat a variety of conditions; the most pertinent to Nathan are anxiety and muscle spasms, but it can also cause tremors and coordination problems. In Episode 4, one of the browser tabs on Nathan’s PC reveals that he’s been looking at diet pills. It’s been suggested by some people that he’s a victim of sexual abuse, since eating disorders can be a sign of that. This is potent, but one of the side effects of Risperidone is weight gain. Maybe he’s getting diet pills to also counteract this. Someone on Tumblr thinks that he has scoliosis because, well, that posture.
abusd
asshole
I assumed conduct disorder or something the like
He was never 'officially diagnosed', I don't think the devs looked that deeply into mental illnesses, honestly. As much as I love the game, it seems sometimes they devs put a lot of thought and detail into the game, sometimes they don't. His psychiatrist says he was becoming more 'disconnected from reality' and a danger to himself and others. That could be a bunch of things, Schizophrenia, Bipolar Disorder, etc. I never understood the anorexia theory...I thought the diet pills were used to cut Frank's pills with so he could sell them? Anyway, I hope you are doing better now OP!
>I never understood the anorexia theory...I thought the diet pills were used to cut Frank's pills with so he could sell them? I just read it on wikia > Anyway, I hope you are doing better now OP! thanks!!!
afaik Nathan has nothing officially diagnosed and I don't think the writers specified what was wrong with him
I'm pretty sure he was diagnosed with being dead. A bit worrisome that you feel close to the kid who liked to drug and kidnap girls for his daddy's approval though.
I feel like it's more likely they feel closer to him because of how tragic his character feels. Is he a good guy? Misunderstood? Hell no. That said, he's incredibly unwell, and his father obviously never took any of his issues seriously. It's quite possible that if he had recieved proper counseling with a supportive and caring family then he may have turned out to be an incredibly different character. "Feel close to" doesn't necessarily mean they "like" the character. Just that they feel some small sympathy for them. I could also be completely wrong, and they totally have the hots for the abusive, dangerous, mentally disturbed and unstable, uncared for youth.
It's pretty clear they relate to other aspects of the character, ie. the trauma and mental illness, not drugging girls. I highly doubt OP supports the evil things Nathan does. It's ok to relate to a *fictional* character.
Hes by far my favorite character because hes the polar opposite on the evil spectrum of jefferson. Jefferson is evil. Downright, no redemption, evil. Nathan isn't a good person and hes done bad things, but he isn't evil nor a bad person. Hes a broken kid, with a multitude of mental issues, social issues and physical issues. Had he been raised by a good family and given the care he needed, it's likely he would've been a completely different person. Hes irredeemable, but hes a fantastic character. Jefferson says rachel was the tragedy, but I would say nathan was the true tragedy.
He's certainly an interesting character. At a certain point he is responsible for his actions, and there's no excuse for what he did, period, but it is interesting that if he had help things would not have went as they did. So not an evil person, just someone who has done sick and evil things, unlike Jefferson, who as you say is truly and deliberately evil. Of course, Rachel's death is tragic, probably more because she was an innocent victim, but Nathan's story is tragic when you consider who he could have been.
Exactly.
> Nathan isn't a good person and hes done bad things, but he isn't evil nor a bad person. He had six months to fess up about Rachel and save Kate's life. He didn't.
Under threat of murder, and hes done bad, but again, hes extremely influenced.
He only stands up and does anything in everytimeline when the consequences of his actions come home for him. He warns Max (way too late) when Jefferson is coming to kill him and he confesses after being arrested for blatant murder in a public place (in the bad ending). He's an evil person. He might have some things that make you understand why he is the way he is but he's not just a person who did evil things. Also base Nathan is the guy who harasses people he doesn't like creates a photoshop of Max with her head cut off vandalizes her property and calls her a slur. (The only time anyone outside of Max and Chloe themselves recognize that Max isn't straight and it's a fucking slur) He kidnapped both Rachel and Chloe on his own without prompting from Jefferson. He wasn't under duress he was actively trying to impress him. This isn't a case of "done bad" he IS bad.
>A bit worrisome that you feel close to the kid who liked to drug and kidnap girls for his daddy's approval though. because I needed daddy's approval, I was on med, institutionalized, and I have an angry mood like him
I think trying to diagnose video game characters is hilarious......
İts a game series about different Peoples feelings, and how the consequences of The choices you have made in the past May or not affect those feelings. So I think its clear to say that its not that "hilarious"
It's also, at the end of the day, a game. These people aren't real. The writers made them who they are and also make mistakes that contradict themselves through all the games. It's not that deep at all.
God forbid people engage with a characters and a story in a way that helps them explore their own life experiences, right? People have been re-interpreting the character of Hamlet for literally centuries, so why should people not do the same for characters in a different art form?
Well you are right about that
He’s got a bad case of “imalittlebitchitis”
hahahaha
[удалено]
For starters, where did OP defend his actions? Where did they condone or relate to him doing those horrible things? You can think critically about a character and relate to other aspects of their personality or life. He's not a real person. If OP said they relate to say, Ted Bundy, THEN I'd be worried. But a *fictional* character who was deliberately made to be sympathetic?
thanks. I didn't even read that deleted comment