I was aware of the original source material, that there is related manga, a quasi-related live action, and so on. Considering the points raised, Maeda's comments on the creative process are suggestive of differences noted between the stories, and naturally enough differing formats.Originally Posted by UltimateKane99
firstly to be clear, I said that Ryou was underrepresented, not her sister, Kyou. Comparatively speaking Kyou was a principl character, leading dialogue and actions when present in almost any scene.Look at it from this perspective. On the one hand, we have Kyou helping her sister 24/7 to get together with Tomoya. She sets up lunches, helps prepare the bentou, etc., since Ryou confessed her love for Tomoya. At the same time, though, Kyou is in love with Tomoya. As a tsundere character, her first character rule is "don't let others view your emotions". Throughout Clannad and After Story, it's pretty clear that she's got some emotions for Tomoya, but doesn't want to act on them (which was cleared up in the OVA as she didn't want to ruin her friendship).
Kyou's behaviour is more or less typical of humanation rationalisation (or 'ego preservation' in other paradigms), where decisions are made in a manner which ensures ego (self concept etc) can maintain a sense of equilibrium with one's personal values and ideals. Kyou's desires and conflicted feelings are subconsciously negotiated through assisting her sister's interests. The rationalisation provides both internal and external reasons for Kyou to interact with Okazaki and to inquire on his feelings. This is not to say Kyou is being insincere or deceptive, I would say she naturally believes her own reasons, and as it is they are not inherently untrue. However the difference between reasons for involvement and actions relevant to the same reveal the affective locus of Kyou's motivations. When presented with apparent opportunity, Kyou though hesistant (including aforesaid reasons) is personally willing to be intimate with Okazaki. There is often a critical difference between the account and the actions that occur whenever an issue (in any context) comes to an impasse.
with awareness of matters more involved than friendship, it should also be clarified there is a categorical difference between "distraught" with that of borderline personality disorder (a fragmentation of self-concept at the least), and is one more example of lack of continuity where Kyou's reaction to the same underlying catalyst has been demonstrated. There is also a lack of resolution post-conflict, however, the subject of character progression is moot across alternate contexts when character integrity is marginalised for the expedience of the multi-girl fantasy format.So she's got a bit of a defense built up in the main arc, and when Tomoya shows the noticeable love for Nagisa in the tennis match with Tomoyo (helping boost the student council president-to-be's reputation, which was actually supposed to be in Tomoyo's arc, not Nagisa's, but oh well), she breaks down crying as well. With feelings as clear as those, is it any wonder that she's so distraught that her TWIN sister, who is like her in every physical way, was able to get Tomoya's attention while she was worried about her friendship?
Maeda's comments can be read as a partial account for the source of thematic conflict or variance, and the discrepencies across the central and alternate stories. The differences illustrate the levels of creative focus and direction, and in result are not all that peculiar when the original design was paradoxical in nature.
in mind of the defining qualities of Clannad + Afterstory, and with respect to different formats and their functions, adherence to a multi-girl format is not especially warranted or useful. The anime would make for a suitable point of departure to focus beyond divergent aspects so as to emphasise supplementary material more intuitively aligned with the core story themes and ideas.