"Heroics" that left a bad taste in your mouth

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 NEXT
 

Mikejames:
Corvo can get away with offing plenty of people regardless of their level of involvement; his personal revenge is a pretty thin justification at that point.
I just don't like the ideology that selling your enemy's accomplice to a potential rapist is what's supposed to lead to a happier ending on your part.

Well, his revenge is probably why he's going along with the plan. The low-level mooks he kills, that's defending himself/making sure he doesn't get caught.
And I don't think you're supposed to 'like it'. Corvo is at best a sadist who makes deals with the devil's stand-in like they're going out of style, and, at worst, is a mass-murdering fuckhead.

And really, both endings are 'happy' for Corvo. All he wants to do is rescue Emily and get rid of the people who killed Jessamine.

Catfood220:

Unia:
Sometimes the protagonist of a game does something you find distasteful or morally suspect and then just passes it off with a oneliner we're apparently supposed to laugh at.

In Uncharted 2 there's a bit where Nathan goes off with a buddy to get something from a Turkish museum. Drake objects to using guns, to which I thought "Oh, he doesn't want to shoot guards for doing their job. Maybe this guy's alright after all." Nope. Few minutes later he throws a guard to his death, and his buddy even jokes about it.

Drake doesn't kill the guard, if you look down after you pull him off the roof, you can quite clearly see him swimming away. I know this to be true, I checked it out the last time I played through the game.

Phew! I was thinking about this this morning incidentally. Now I can rest easy.

OT: Pretty sure I got ninja'd on this, but it bears repeating; everything Kratos does in the second game onwards. Honestly, I've reached the point where I name Kratos one of my favorite video game villains.

TrilbyWill:

Well, his revenge is probably why he's going along with the plan. The low-level mooks he kills, that's defending himself/making sure he doesn't get caught.
And I don't think you're supposed to 'like it'. Corvo is at best a sadist who makes deals with the devil's stand-in like they're going out of style, and, at worst, is a mass-murdering fuckhead.

And really, both endings are 'happy' for Corvo. All he wants to do is rescue Emily and get rid of the people who killed Jessamine.

Fair enough. Though it certainly would have helped the whole established motivation and driving the consequences of such actions home if Corvo was actually capable of emotion.

Saviordd1:

saluraropicrusa:

Saviordd1:
This is implying Renegade/Paragon was anything other than "black v. white"

I mean, in the first game you have the option to slaughter a colony because renegade shepard just isn't feelin' the whole saving people thing today.

I would contest that Paragon/Renegade is, for the most part, anything BUT "black v. white." The majority of renegade choices aren't about being evil, they're about being kind of a dick but doing so with the ultimate goal of saving everyone. Renegade Shepard doesn't have time for anyone's shit, they want to finish the job in a way that gives them the best possible advantage against their enemy without caring who they have to step on. That's not evil, it's just being an ass about it.

I figured the way renegade Shep would justify their actions on Feros would be to say that they're working to save the ENTIRE GALAXY, so a handful of dead colonists was the least of their worries. It's strange that your teammates just go along with it though.

No, that's lazy and evil.

Lets also go down the list of things renegade Shepard has done

*Shot their friends
*Continuously tells their teammates to shut the hell up about their problems
*Punches a reporter
*Kills the leading government for humanities gain
*Gets countless innocents killed cause fuck it
*Leaves a refinery to burn for one mans personal bullshit
*Let one of the greatest warriors in the galaxy commit suicide and then killed her daughter, cause fuck it

and more I've forgotten.

These aren't "Looking at the big picture" these are being evil and lazy. That's what renegade Shepard is, and has been, evil and lazy.

I never said it wasn't lazy. It very well may be. However, I still don't think Renegade Shepard is evil (though I can't really defend the ME3 renegade path, since it was a shift from "asshole with good intentions" to "complete, idiotic dickwad").

*I don't remember any instance where Shep shot one of their friends without SOME sort of justification
*I'd chalk that up to an attitude of "don't let your problems get in the way of the mission, which is the most important thing right now." That's not evil, it's just insensitive.
*She deserved it. >:( (but even if she didn't, all he did was punch her. She'll get over it)
*It wasn't "for humanity's gain." The choice was save a huge number of human lives, or the lives of three alien council members (who, while important, are still replaceable).
*I can't really form a defence here since I don't know what instance(s) you're referring to.
*This one's iffy, I'll agree. However, I didn't say all of Shep's Renegade decisions weren't black v. white. Only a good chunk of them.
*Again, I can't defend ME3 Shep's Renegade path. They really went overboard with that. I will say, however, at least when it comes to killing the daughter, Shep could argue that it's too dangerous to let an Ardat-Yakshi live, especially given how she could still be turned into a banshee.

Shockolate:
First thing to come to mind is fightning Ceaseless Discharge in Dark Souls, since I just killed him yesterday.

You can avoid fighting him if you have high vitality and the Dark Wood Grain Ring, but most people don't know that.

He isn't hostile until you provoke him by either A) Attacking him or B) Taking the suit of armor in his area.

There is an incredibly easy way to kill him in which you lure him out to deep pit, in which he'll jump over it to try and get to you. If you whack his hand enough times, he slips and falls into the pit, supposedly dying. He'll only do this if you've taken the armor.

My friends going crazy, confronting the tragedies of the past, forcing me to kill monsters with good intentions?

Dark Souls is not a happy game.

That makes me almost as sad as having to put the big puppy down. I really wish that there was a way to spare him like the rumors said there was. Seriously, I would do whatever nonsense was required to not have to put the poor critter down.

trty00:
Same goes for Jason Brody actually, when is he portrayed as anything other than a guy trying to save his friends?

Protagonist =/= Hero

*spoilers

In the first 10 mins of the game jason breaks out of Vaas's compound. He is then found by a local named Dennis. He then gets Jason to help get rid of the pirates that live on the island. You know, the ones that are required to "Shoot ANY local on sight". Sure Jason gets to rescue his friends as part of it, but he instead of leaving with them he sticks around to finish what he started.

The man almost singlehandedly liberated an island. Jason may not think he is a hero, but if I was a local I wouldn't see him as anything else.

saluraropicrusa:

Saviordd1:

saluraropicrusa:

I would contest that Paragon/Renegade is, for the most part, anything BUT "black v. white." The majority of renegade choices aren't about being evil, they're about being kind of a dick but doing so with the ultimate goal of saving everyone. Renegade Shepard doesn't have time for anyone's shit, they want to finish the job in a way that gives them the best possible advantage against their enemy without caring who they have to step on. That's not evil, it's just being an ass about it.

I figured the way renegade Shep would justify their actions on Feros would be to say that they're working to save the ENTIRE GALAXY, so a handful of dead colonists was the least of their worries. It's strange that your teammates just go along with it though.

No, that's lazy and evil.

Lets also go down the list of things renegade Shepard has done

*Shot their friends
*Continuously tells their teammates to shut the hell up about their problems
*Punches a reporter
*Kills the leading government for humanities gain
*Gets countless innocents killed cause fuck it
*Leaves a refinery to burn for one mans personal bullshit
*Let one of the greatest warriors in the galaxy commit suicide and then killed her daughter, cause fuck it

and more I've forgotten.

These aren't "Looking at the big picture" these are being evil and lazy. That's what renegade Shepard is, and has been, evil and lazy.

I never said it wasn't lazy. It very well may be. However, I still don't think Renegade Shepard is evil (though I can't really defend the ME3 renegade path, since it was a shift from "asshole with good intentions" to "complete, idiotic dickwad").

*I don't remember any instance where Shep shot one of their friends without SOME sort of justification
*I'd chalk that up to an attitude of "don't let your problems get in the way of the mission, which is the most important thing right now." That's not evil, it's just insensitive.
*She deserved it. >:( (but even if she didn't, all he did was punch her. She'll get over it)
*It wasn't "for humanity's gain." The choice was save a huge number of human lives, or the lives of three alien council members (who, while important, are still replaceable).
*I can't really form a defence here since I don't know what instance(s) you're referring to.
*This one's iffy, I'll agree. However, I didn't say all of Shep's Renegade decisions weren't black v. white. Only a good chunk of them.
*Again, I can't defend ME3 Shep's Renegade path. They really went overboard with that. I will say, however, at least when it comes to killing the daughter, Shep could argue that it's too dangerous to let an Ardat-Yakshi live, especially given how she could still be turned into a banshee.

So basically your defenses are "We don't have 5 seconds to do X." Not exactly heroic, or badass.

Also, the refinery thing is in reference to Zaeed.

And the council thing? Your wrong


Skip to about 0:35

Yeah, and that IS the Renegade response.

trty00:

No, this thread is for HEROICS that left a bad taste in you mouth.

Once again, Jason's skinning isn't portrayed as heroism. He's skinning animals in order to increase his survival. It's not heroics, dude's just trying to get by. Simple as. Besides, it's not like when you skin the animal all of its flesh is shown to be stripped, the corpse is just bloody. You criticized me on Lara's complacency, and used the argument that we don't see her present during Calvin's atrocities. Same basic principle. You don't see it, so how do you know? See how that goes both ways?



Way to not actually adress any of my arguments about Django by the way.


Finally, and this one goes out to several people.

Kratos? Fucking really?! I could understand how you might be uncomfortable with the stuff he does, but when the fuck is he portrayed as the good guy in any GOW games that aren't the first one? Same goes for Jason Brody actually, when is he portrayed as anything other than a guy trying to save his friends?

Protagonist =/= Hero

i would not call a simple man that turns out to be "the chosen one/ the chosen warrior" a common dude.

A hero (heroine is sometimes used for females) (Ancient Greek: ἥρως, hḗrōs), in Greek mythology and folklore, was originally a demigod, their cult being one of the most distinctive features of ancient Greek religion.[1] A demigod is the son or daughter from one immortal and one mortal parent, an example would be Heracles, son of the mortal queen Alcmene and the god Zeus. [2] Later, hero (male) and heroine (female) came to refer to characters who, in the face of danger and adversity or from a position of weakness, display courage and the will for self sacrifice-that is, heroism-for some greater good of all humanity. This definition originally referred to martial courage or excellence but extended to more general moral excellence.

lets check it.

he might be a demi god. THE warrior. check.
face of danger and adversity or from a position of weakness, display courage and the will for self sacrifice. check.

that qualifies jason as a hero. okay, that is a bit of overstretching. lets move on.

how do i know that he isnt taking all of the animals skin?
it is implied.
do you know how large one tiger is?
image
yes, and you need to skin 6 of them to carry 3 more clips for your gun. isnt that great?

you dont really need to hunt and skin them to progress in the story (well, except one mission at the beginning).
and thats why the survival bit fades away, its not like you need to hunt them down or otherwise they will organise and hunt you down.

you just do it so you can shoot more people in the face. is a questionable design choice that could had been eased with the ability to buy these damn things and not having to hunt down a more rare and endangered animal to unlock the ultimate upgrade of these bags.

and to django, no need to get upset.
didnt it occur to you that i might had agreed on some points you made and didnt feel the need to discuss it further?

okay, let me think of some points.

so its okay for lara to die because she didnt intervene in his brothers business or perhaps didnt know how far his brother went with the slaves.

or because she might had been disconnected with the slaves because it isnt her job to care for them or watch over them and it isnt lady like(like it was in that time) to be meddling with slaves in any form.
i mean that is Stephen job, isnt it?

and its clearly uncommon to see your relatives often potrayed in a better light than they actually should be.
so she had no reason to be upset with a guest comming into her house to shoot her brother. yep.

and your point that "You don't see it, so how do you know?" also aplies here. how do you know that she knows what her brother really does if you dont see her.

maybe she is like hitlers relatives that deserve to die in peoples opinion because they are related to an evil man and therefore they are also evil.
see, thats not really a good argument to justify her death.

the only argument that might hold is that django just wants to cover up his tracks.
but then again, why does he let the servants that clearly enjoyed a higher lifestyle just get away?

thedoclc:
Moira from Fallout 3 is portrayed as a sympathetic character who cheerfully sends you into a minefield, asks you to get radiation poisoning, and so on. She acts like a cheery cuckoolander, but that woman is a sadistic witch taking advantage of the Vault Dweller's utter naivete.

He's not the Vault Dweller that's the hero of the first game, he's The Lone Wanderer.

OT: Almost everything that Connor says or does in AC3, it just leaves a bad taste because, well, it's so damn sketchy.

Saviordd1:
snop

I'm not entirely sure which point(s) you're referring to with the "we don't have five seconds to do X" thing. Could you clarify?

I did respond to the point about the refinery. It's the one I pointed out as being "iffy" (though that might not be a strong enough word for it). That one was dumb. Though I think Renegade is a case of "doing whatever it takes to get the right allies" in the case of the second game. That's not always a good thing.

You can be renegade without choosing that dialog option. Though I agree that it's a case of Shep being an asshole, I still wouldn't call it being "evil." Moments after that response Udina says "the end justifies the means" and I think that sums up Renegade Shepard fairly nicely (the end here being a council that will look out for humanity, and will aid Shepard--though they never actually do).

There are definitely Renegade decisions that aren't just "evil" or even "being a jerk." For example, the choice not to destroy the heretic Geth. If I remember correctly, the Renegade response is to overwrite them. Given the nature of the Geth and everything Legion tells you, this is far from an "evil" decision. I can't and won't defend every single Renegade choice (picking Morinth over Samara is very, very dumb and only makes sense with a very, very Renegade Shep), but I won't concede to Renegade = evil.

You might want to put that in spoiler tags, the game is still quite new and its a dick move to spoil things. Anyway, on topic, with the subtitles turned on it turns out he actually said "that was harder than I thought".

Mikejames:

kman123:
Dishonored really screwed up on the good/bad moral dilemma, seeing as the 'good' version of doing things is far, far worse than death. Selling someone into slavery for the rest of their life? Giving up that woman to that stalker dude was fucking creepy. I'd rather just kill her but nooooooooo I had to get the GOOD ending.

Wait wait, I just started the game, and the more moral conclusion essentially entails you becoming a human trafficker?
Those are some bloody terrible implications concerning the writers...

It's less cut and dry than that. The reasons to find the "stalker" creepy are alright but not that strong given the circumstances and the reasons to assume he's a rapist. Also the creepier things he does say are said after you have done the route.

What happens with him is

The good route is certainly the more variable route but it's not as if you just knowingly sold her to a random pimp.

Every God of War game I ever played. Kratos makes for one huge jerk - he can only relate through killing. This guy killed his wife, his daughter, his brother, his mother, his father, his mentor, his friend - not to mention the whole of mankind, quite literally by GoW III. And don't get me started about his "enemies".

AgentLampshade:
Snow. Fucking. Villiers. Dumbass self-proclaimed "hero" and complete tool who even says "heroes don't need plans." Argh!

Every single thing he does isn't thought through at all.

That is his character. He is brash and arrogant. Hard-headed. He is the typical "warrior" or "Tank". Run in first, ask questions later.

Xanadu84:
Any time a hero fights fair when the dirty option is available. I'm sorry, if you are in a life or death scenario where innocents are at stake, then sacrificing an advantage that could lead to you losing, and innocent people dying, your bullshit aestetics about, "Honor", which is really just, "Feeling cool", does not matter. Whats even worse is when it is rewarded because of course the hero is going to win.

Disagree completely. Being a hero, with a classical/Campbellian view of things, means you take the fair fight, the hard way out, no matter the costs. Of course, that usually leads to a nice tragedy, but none-the-less what a typical hero would be expected to do. I also don't think that this is what the OP originally intended for an example.

Oh, and honor isn't always about "feeling cool," it can have actual meaning to people and even entire cultures. I'd hardly call it "cool."

But, for my own examples, pretty much anything Conor did outside of the Homestead. I found him to be pleasant, a really decent guy when talking to those he "rescued," but whenever he was out in the world, doing missions/committing revenge, he was a complete arse. Almost an anti-hero and going between the two felt like I was playing two very separate versions of Connor. No sense at all.

Johnny Novgorod:
Every God of War game I ever played. Kratos makes for one huge jerk - he can only relate through killing. This guy killed his wife, his daughter, his brother, his mother, his father, his mentor, his friend - not to mention the whole of mankind, quite literally by GoW III. And don't get me started about his "enemies".

Was Kratos ever really meant to be heroic? The OP says that say , spec ops wouldn't count because the protagonist's actions were supposed to be depressing, well isn't Kratos supposed to be an asshole? If he's not than I fear to think what designers think an actual asshole is. I think this is supposed to only be for things that are supposed to be seen as heroic that actually are not.

I can't think of anything besides fable 3's fucking retarded emperor mode :build an orphanage, or build a brothel, and if you build a brothel and keep it up for a year you'll save hundreds of thousands of lives, and the brothel is apparently the evil option. YOU CAN'T FUCKING ACT LIKE THE MONEY GRUBBING ROUTE IS ALWAYS EVIL IF YOUR MONEY GRUBBING WILL SAVE COUNTLESS LIVES/THE WHOLE WORLD. Dear lord that game was ass

Most JRPGs making me kow-tow to jerks so I can get a key that I need to stop some villain from destroying the world. Like, I get you're a nice person, but damn, seriously? That nice?

Failing to kill Carth at the end of KotoR. I consider it "heroic" in the sense that I have a heroically huge hatred for Carth.

Persona 3 and 4 social links. I think they're fun, but in P3 especially, I got the sense that he secretly hated those people. There's a moment where you hang out with a friend, and he asks you what he should buy his nephew, who is suffering from an injury that prevents him from walking. One of the potential responses is "running shoes." Damn, what an asshole.

SMT: Nocturne's True Demon Ending. That shit gave me nightmares.

I'm not really defining heroic as in "a person/action to look up to that's altruistic," I'm thinking in terms of proportions. If it's good guy stuff that actually made me sad or mad, other than the JRPG thing, it's helping Samesh Bhatia get his wife's corpse as a Renegade. Like damn man, did you really have to threaten that kid like that?

mike1921:

Johnny Novgorod:
Every God of War game I ever played. Kratos makes for one huge jerk - he can only relate through killing. This guy killed his wife, his daughter, his brother, his mother, his father, his mentor, his friend - not to mention the whole of mankind, quite literally by GoW III. And don't get me started about his "enemies".

Was Kratos ever really meant to be heroic? The OP says that say , spec ops wouldn't count because the protagonist's actions were supposed to be depressing, well isn't Kratos supposed to be an asshole? If he's not than I fear to think what designers think an actual asshole is. I think this is supposed to only be for things that are supposed to be seen as heroic that actually are not.

The problem is that the developers always make a saving throw trying to humanize Kratos, trying to explain his anger and make us empathize with the guy. The whole plethora of dead relatives, for one thing. The devs kill a member of his family for every new game! And when they run out they just make up new relatives to kill! And on they milk their revenge story. Clearly they're trying to make the gamers feel torn between the ends and means of Kratos's plight. Why else would they come up with that sequence in the first game where you're forced to defend - to no use - the memory of you wife and child against murderous copies of yourself? Mercy-kill your mother? Commit patricide, twice? Accidentally murder your friend? Recover your brother only to lose him again? The devs keep coming up with deeply emotional *excuses* for Kratos's rage. And precisely because we bear witness to these "original sins" we're meant to take Kratos not as a hero or a villain but as a tragic hero.

Except it gets a little repetitive after a while, and all we're left with is the indiscriminate slaughter.

Mycroft Holmes:

WanderingFool:

Actually, yes, if we were to go by the Ancient Greek usage of the term Hero.

wikipedia:
A hero, in Greek mythology and folklore, was originally a demigod, their cult being one of the most distinctive features of ancient Greek religion. A demigod is the son or daughter from one immortal and one mortal parent, an example would be Heracles, son of the mortal queen Alcmene and the god Zeus.

The protagonist of Saints Row had a parent who was an immortal deity? I must have missed the part where that's explained.

How else do you explain everything the Boss is able to do. Wouldnt be surprised if he (or she) was actually the son/daughter of Zues himself... though probably disowned because all they did was smoke pot and drop out of college...

In just Cause 2, your character is supposed to be a hero. In reality, despite what the game tells you he's an unabashed terrorist and murderous revolutionary with no morals who blindly follows orders. In fact so much of a villain that I actually found it to be hilarious in that so-bad-it's-good kind of way.

Jason from Far Cry 3 has to be the worst kind seeing as he eventually grows more insane and liking in what he's doing while slowly letting murder get the better of him and leaning more towards Citra even though he actually has a girlfriend who still cares about him and that to me just leaves quite the bad taste in my mouth compared to what Vaas was like he seemed more tame and passed off as a genuine psycho character.

Bolwing:

Noswad:
snip, y'all

Yep, in every Elder Scrolls game you plunder dozens of tombs, and no one seems to mind. It was especially strange in Morrowind, with all the ancestor and Tribunal worship. The Nine Divines have nothing against graverobbing, though.

In my favorite, sorta-roleplaying playthrough of Skyrim thus far, I played my Khajiit as being mentally disturbed after events prior to the start of the game proper culminating in surviving the Helgen attack, and the result PTSD drives her to be absolutely ruthless with her enemies and their resultant corpses.

She had no trouble looting dead bodies, new or old- served them right for trying to kill her. Though a moment that caught me off-guard was when I was cleaning up after a fight, and found my zombified servant suddenly superfluous. I did the humane thing, and bashed its moaning skull in.

"Thank... You..."

I gotta admit, that creeped me out.

Another thing that sorta sucked was taking that odd-job for the kid in Whiterun to get the girl to leave him alone. Turns out she was just picking on him because she loved him and didn't know how to show it, but now she wouldn't have anything to do with him. Not exactly world-shattering stuff here, but there wasn't even an option to tell the kid what he'd just screwed himself out of. And before switching games, one last thing that bothered me intensely when I noticed it. You can marry a wide variety men and women, and even adopt a kid or two, regardless of who you play as. All very progressive, I'm sure. But no matter who they are, you can't tell them you love them, or even refer to them affectionately in any way. You just sorta bark orders at your spouse for them to give you money and pies and move somewhere else, and that's it. I'd heard the word "soulless" used to describe Skyrim, and after seeing the purest expression of familial love reduced to little more than a fucking stat bonus, I believe it.

*sigh* Moving on.

I know the original post said not to mention Spec Ops but FUCK IT I'm gonna anyway. During the big firefight in The Hive, there comes a moment where you are required to flank a turret nest. While making your way around, a civilian runs into the line of fire. The color of her clothes is roughly the same as the 33rd's desert camo, and they've by now introduced you to the CQC experts that run at you with a knife and threaten to one-hit-kill you if they get too close. So if you're like me your first reaction upon seeing someone run at you, with someone shooting at you from behind them, was to gun everyone down first and ask questions later. However, unlike the other "you are a bastard" moments in this game, the encounter was very understated and was over in a heartbeat and they never mention it again, but that nagging realization of "I just shot an unarmed woman" stuck with me for a while afterward.

j-e-f-f-e-r-s:

LarenzoAOG:

Yoshemo:

There were plenty of times I killed an innocent or did some other sadistic thing and Kreia scolded me for it. Shes fine with cruelty to your own advantage but senseless cruelty is wrong

Yeah but there isn't anything to do light side wise that gives you favor with her. At least not that I know, but I play KOTOR almost exclusively light side.

Considering who she ends up being revealed as at the end of the game, why exactly are you expecting her to give your brownie points for being Light Side? That goes against everything she believes in.

She knows the Exile has to defeat the main baddies, the ones that betrayed her, but she refuses to like you if you do light side stuff, which means she also refuses to teach you the neat force tricks, I only got to learn them by using a conversation glitch where I make the same astounding realization over and over until she liked me enough to teach me force stuff despite my good nature.

Capitano Segnaposto:
That is his character. He is brash and arrogant. Hard-headed. He is the typical "warrior" or "Tank". Run in first, ask questions later.

That doesn't make him exempt from criticism. It's still grating when you hear him saying the exact same thing at the end. He learned nothing from the events of the story. He's as hard-headed at the end as he is at the start. For god's sake, Hope has a better character arc than him.

6th And Silver:
I'm surprised I'm not seeing this more often. I definitely nominate Uncharted's Nathan Drake. He has the most punchable face in gaming. Bonus Douche Points for constantly becoming a Chosen-One-esque "hero" simply by the virtue of being the handsomest douche in the room.

I'd hardly say he's ever even close to be the chosen one in the slightest respect. However he is almost always a hero by accident, with his original plots being closer to "Treasure = gold = riches", the fact he ends up saving the world is often because someone else intends to misuse whatever treasure/wealth/secret power that the game is centered around. Through that almost all of his heroics leave a bad taste in my mouth because you can tell he's getting fed up of it.

AgentLampshade:
Snow. Fucking. Villiers. Dumbass self-proclaimed "hero" and complete tool who even says "heroes don't need plans." Argh!

Every single thing he does isn't thought through at all.

Character development, character development, the scene where Hope has a go at him on that rooftop...yeah Snow realizes he was being an idiot and starts to change his ways.

Spoilers ahead.

Having to work with Cerberus in Mass Effect 2. To me they felt like that era's Nazi Party in the way they frequently achieved their goals. As Miranda tells you; Cerberus teams are given the resources they need and are told to do whatever they want with it. That code of ethics lead to the Sole Survivor character arc and realated missions, Jack's nightmarish childhood, David's torment in the Overlord DLC, etc. Read up on Cerberus' activities for more information. The Illusive Man tries to paint himself as protector of humanity; after Jack's Loyalty mission he claims to have shut down the experiments once he learned of them, but the fact is Cerberus policy allows for these experiments to happen and don't really care so long as they get results.

To quote; "If you throw something into the air you have to worry about where it lands." The Illusive Man believes history will justify his actions? Ask Hitler how that turned out. Lost lots of repect for Joker when he willing joined Cerberus since he must know what they've done through Shepard's missions against them. I'm not going to list Cerberus' actions in ME3 however; since I feel that as the Illusive Man was the Reaper's puppet any chance of true retribution against him was lost.

Shockolate:
Dark Souls is not a happy game.

Four pages and no one's mentioned "Shadow of the Colossus" yet?! Sure, bringing your love back and all, but those gentle, peaceful creatures were just minding their own business until you decide to crawl up their bodies and go all stabby on them!

Also, "B-17: Flying Fortress". I love the game, but dropping tons of bombs on civilian targets to the whoops and cheers of the crew just feels kinda... weird.

Finally, the entire "Killzone" series. Once you familiarize yourself with the universe, it's quite clear that the Helghast were being bullied by the ISA for a VERY long time, and in the first game were in fact merely trying to take back their one habitable planet, from which the ISA had exiled them to go live in a barren hell hole.

Saviordd1:

*Kills the leading government for humanities gain

While I Agree with all the rest of your points, this one I feel can be argued.

First off, Shepard doesn't kill the Council, she merely tells the Alliance fleet not to save them.

Secondly, the way the choice is presented in the game, the options are for the Arcturus Fleet to move in to help the Destiny Ascension, or stay out of the fight until Shepard opens the Citadel's arms and concentrate all fire on Sovereign.

I almost always choose the latter option. Defeating Sovereign is the most important thing at that point. I can't justify potentially losing ships (and thereby firepower) saving the council when we might need every ship and every ounce of firepower to defeat Sovereign. Saving the council means nothing if Sovereign wins.

Now, I know this is a game, and therefore you'll still be able to win if you save the Ascension, but in-game, Shepard has no way of knowing this. It makes sense (to me at least) to let the Council die rather than risk losing everything.

OT: Ezio. Just Ezio. Guy goes all Assassin to avenge his family, then proceeds to kill more people than his enemies ever did.

Lazy:
Assassin's Creed III had a few of these moments for me, specifically when you're looking for Captain Kidd's letters. In one Connor chases after a looter who'd found the letter he was looking for, shouting the whole time that it belongs to him (how do you figure that, Connor?) and ultimately murdering him over it. Later he destroys an entire fort for the measly scrap of paper he has no claim to, condemning who knows how many people to fiery, agonizing deaths for the sake of his own wealth.

Frankly, Connor comes across as a pretty massive asshole in general, and the game's attempts to paint him as heroic (if naive) just make him that much more irritating.

To be fair, those were pirates, in a pirate fort. Hardly innocent guys.

And isn't that an issue with all Assassins Creed games? I remember 2 being particularly anal about me killing any civilian, but it had no problem in me decimating the entire population of policemen in renascent Venice because they, justifiably, suspect of the guy climbing the side of the palace with a greatsword on his side.

hermes200:

Lazy:
Assassin's Creed III had a few of these moments for me, specifically when you're looking for Captain Kidd's letters. In one Connor chases after a looter who'd found the letter he was looking for, shouting the whole time that it belongs to him (how do you figure that, Connor?) and ultimately murdering him over it. Later he destroys an entire fort for the measly scrap of paper he has no claim to, condemning who knows how many people to fiery, agonizing deaths for the sake of his own wealth.

Frankly, Connor comes across as a pretty massive asshole in general, and the game's attempts to paint him as heroic (if naive) just make him that much more irritating.

To be fair, those were pirates, in a pirate fort. Hardly innocent guys.

And isn't that an issue with all Assassins Creed games? I remember 2 being particularly anal about me killing any civilian, but it had no problem in me decimating the entire population of policemen in renascent Venice because they, justifiably, suspect of the guy climbing the side of the palace with a greatsword on his side.

A) Huh, I thought I remembered them being British troops. In any case it's still pretty fucked up, and a really dumb plan to begin with considering he could just as easily been killed by the cannons as everyone else in the fort.

B) I'm referring more to stuff characters do in the context of the story than in gameplay, though Ezio is still a pretty huge douche even then. Connor's just more recent, I guess, plus his personality is more outwardly dickish.

Anti-American Eagle:
All of Postal 2... that was a joke

Some of the quests in the witcher/2 left odd tastes in my mouth after I thought about them.

Well i couldnt stand roche.. he was way to fucked up.. i chose Iorveth instead :P but gotta start my 2nd playthrough soon.. or 3rd.. and prob a 4th xD love it :)

The end of Assassin's Creed 2:

Krantos:
-meaningless conjecture in the face of evidence-

Skip to 4:00

Case closed.

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 NEXT

Reply to Thread

This thread is locked