I've seen a lot of different reactions to season 3 of Squid Game, and some of these reactions can be described as "feeling disappointed". However, for me, season 2 and 3 hit all the right points. It's really difficult to write a sequel and ending for a series that became so popular and in the end I think it delivered the best and most suitable conclusion possible.
I do think there was perhaps a little bit of potential for an even greater and more impactful creative work, and in some ways, a few "safe" decisions where made, but that is absolutely understandable considering the extreme popularity that the series reached after season 1.
First of all, squid game is perfectly internally consistent. All the writing decisions align to the world and character decisions as it was in season 1.
In other words, this is basically the story of Gi-Hun and how he experiences these death games. This means that, compared to Gi-Hun, other character stories and depictions are secondary to that of Gi-Hun. This also means that Gi-Hun would HAVE to survive until the last episode.
A truly risky and brave writing decision would have been if Gi-Hun does NOT survive until the last episode, but is killed during the "key, knife" game or the rope jump game. However, since, up to that point, the story has revolved around him so much that it defines the whole series - after all, this is a story about Gi-Hun's experience of death games, that it was a writing decision that would not have easily worked.
If Gi-Hun died early, the story would have felt somewhat empty and pointless, since the story has been told from the perspective of his experience. It might have been possible to pass over the story interest to a follow-up character which could have taken Gi-Hun's place and in a way the baby was such a character and somewhat did take over the story focus, but this could only be done to a limited extent.
Instead, a real compelling character would have to have been able to take over the role of Gi-Hun in this story and there was no such character. In my opinion, the closest to such a role was the character Hyun-Ju and interestingly this is also a character with a "straight arrow of morality and clear conscience" type of a characteristic, just like Gi-Hun.
However, from a writers perspective, keeping Gi-Hun as the main character in focus is the safer choice to make and the most sensible.
In my previous discussion, I talked about ideas of winning and losing and the character Gi-Hun as the focus of the story. Thus, in season 2 and 3 Gi-Hun remains the focus of the story. In fact, this is for me the charm and uniqueness of this series. Death game type of stories have been done many times, but the uniqueness of Squid Game, for me, is that it tells the story from the perspective of one character, Gi-Hun.
Instead of interpreting Gi-Hun's luck as plot armour, instead, imagine that all the character stories played out in a certain way and the story of Gi-Hun, the ultimate survivor, is simply told through the series. Thus we are not dealing with plot armour to explain Gi-Hun's good luck and high survival rate, but rather, story elements like themes, choices and so forth.
In season 1, the fact that Gi-Hun has incredible luck to keep on surviving is quite noticeable, and his luck continues in season 2 and 3.
The creators of the squid game seem to believe that "success" and thus also "survival" has something to do with a "quality" of a person, but the question of ethics and morality keep on being repeatedly asked in the series.
Must a winner sacrifice his humanity, become completely pragmatic to win and survive? Is ruthlessness necessary to survive? The creators of the game seem to strongly believe that ruthlessness and pragmatism is needed to survive. It is fitting that the frontman went through such a harsh step himself to win when he was in the game. He had to be completely ruthless and pragmatic to win.
In my previous discussion I pointed out that Gi-Hun most probably has an ENFP personality type. To be clear, it is not that I necessarily believe that the writer studied personality types and wrote it to be that way on purpose. Instead what I believe often happens is that the MBTI framework has good to high predictive value when it comes to describing personality, behaviour and choices. Thus there is a high chance that believable characters could fall into some personality classification.
Gi-Hun's personality type is relevant throughout the story. When it comes to morality and ethics, it often comes down to pragmatic choices and often these could be compared to trolley problems. For example, is it more ethical to save young people or old people, more people or less people, and so forth. Yourself over someone else, or should you self-sacrifice. Thus the ending of Gi-Hun, sacrificing himself for a baby is once again basically his character's answer to a trolley problem.
When Gi-Hun is faced with a decision, he tends to always make the decision based on the morality of what is directly in front of him. For example, he would rather help out friends and allies even if they are weaker, than make a pragmatic choice towards having a physically strong team. The tug-of-war game was an example of that.
For example also, in the last episode, he is faced with the choice of killing the last of his opponents and thus saving himself and the baby, or to continue with the next game.
According to his personality, "who he is", he can't do cold-blooded murder even if it's the pragmatic thing to do.
He is always making the most ethical decision he can make regarding the question right in front of him, but he disregards longer term or "knock on" types of repercussions. It is the same way that he approached the rebellion and wanting to try to stop the games. His decisions reflect a thoughtful approach in terms of direct or short term morality, but a reactive approach in terms of "bigger picture" type of considerations.
The interesting thing is though that he doesn't get punished for being short sighted, rather he gets rewarded with luck. If we assume it is not because of plot armour, but a true story outcome, he does seem to collect good karma through his stubborn upholding of what he deems to be the better moral decisions. In other words, he stubbornly sticks to ideas of humanity even when his surroundings require ruthlessness.
This I believe is a strong narrative theme conveyed on purpose by the writer. The fact that you cannot use pragmatism as an excuse to sacrifice ethics and morality.
In season 1 Gi-Hun once made the pragmatic choice to "cheat" a person with apparent dementia and even with this choice he was spared the ethical consequences. In season 3 he made his most controversial ethical decision when he killed Dae-Ho and even in that interaction he had the moment of wanting to kill Dae-Ho in anger, then choosing not to, but then essentially needing to kill him somewhat out of self-defence, but also out of anger. This is the first real ethical taint on his record of decisions according to how he clings to ideas of humanity in an environment where humanity is stripped away.
The fact that Gi-Hun was on the knife team and HAD to kill someone to survive is important. Even when he is faced with a direct kill or die choice, he doesn't really kill to survive, but rather out of anger.
It is meaningful that the frontman is shown watching Gi-Hun commit murder, just as it was meaningful when the frontman extracted from Gi-Hun the confession that he was willing to make a sacrifice for the greater good. That some players on their side won't be helped so that they can succeed with their rebellion. This was also a step of Gi-Hun towards morally grey decisions, but it once again reveals rather his focus on his emotional need to end the games, even if he needs to resort to a stubborn application of force.
Gi-Hun would have been much more successful in using guile and deception to try to end the games, but that is not how he is.
In my previous discussion I mentioned that there is an aspect of Gi-Hun's depiction that I will elaborate on and it is about the role he plays in the story. Gi-Hun basically becomes like an ethical representative who judges the games, the VIPs and the people running the games. Throughout the story it is like a role he takes on. He is morally outraged that such games can exist, while those around him are pragmatic about it.
In my previous discussion I pointed out how there is a pattern to the size of items in the environment and this pattern continues in season 2 and 3, however there is another interesting aspect to it. All the environments of the games have an intimidating look and feel to it, often conveyed through oversized elements, but the fourth game in all the seasons have an additional intimate feeling to it. The marbles and "key, knife" game creates the feeling that they are inside a scene created with Lego blocks. This is similar to how moving through the stairs and spaces outside the game arenas feel like being inside a doll house. It is also interesting that these two sets with an added element of intimacy are the two sets where Gi-Hun makes his most ethically controversial decisions and actions.
I'm relatively sure that Gi-Hun decided to sacrifice himself to save the baby, even before entering the last game. I think he already judged himself as morally lacking, especially if you also take into account his extreme survivor guilt. Even in his act of sacrificing himself, he casts his judgement on the games and he essentially says that ethics and morality cannot simply be pushed aside.
Without ethics and morality, there cannot be a sensible society.
However, we know that the VIPs and game creators are people who have long ago decided to make pragmatic, and I would almost say predatory, decisions to be able to take on the role of "winners" as they see it. Thus they operate within a totally different understanding of societal frameworks.
This is essentially the whole tension and debate between Gi-Hun and the frontman. Isn't it interesting that one of the VIPs calls Gi-Hun a crazy person, yet Gi-Hun is the one who desperately clings to ideas of morality and humanity.
It is fitting that the décor of the VIPs resemble the artistic style of Henri Rousseau and especially his painting "Tiger in a tropical storm" or "surprised!" which features a predatory tiger stalking his prey.
It is also relevant that Gi-Hun must somehow have believed that the baby would be taken care of if he left the baby as the game winner. The fact that the frontman gave the baby and the money to his brother is a fitting ending I believe, because the frontman knows he can trust his brother to look after the baby. Once again in fact Gi-Hun's focus on relationships and people thus creates the potential of a high ethical outcome in favour of the welfare of the baby.
The moment which was the most devastating for me was when Gi-Hun said "he HAD a daughter". Past tense. This meant that at that moment he didn't see a future where they would be re-uniting and that was when I also knew he made his peace with the fact that he would die in the games. That is actually for me the story climax point. The story of Gi-Hun.