>Those people that go "REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE I WANT TO BE NEUTRAL! WHY DOESN'T THIS GAME ALLOW ME TO BE NEUTRAL!!?!?!? REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE" in an RPG
Is there anything more pathetic?
And to all you neutralfags, please post some compelling choices (or non-choices) a neutral character could make.
Other urls found in this thread:
boards.fireden.net
youtube.com
twitter.com
Is this a copy pasta? I've seen this exact same post before about 2 months ago
> being a do-good faggot
> being an evil edgelord
I choose patrician, I choose neutral
a paragon would tip his waiter; a renegade would bargain for a discount; a neutral person would pay the regular price
This is the last thread from a month ago man.
Paragon = being an ass kisser
Renegade = being a dick
There was no winner.
>Morality comparisons
>Simple ethnics everywhere to use
>Does a food analogy anyway.
>people who try to pay less are evil
Good goy.
Yeah. Renegade would be more like physically threatening the waiter.
>Trying to pay less is evil
Oy Vey!
Neutralfags are the worst
Nobody cares that you think you're so cool that you're an indecisive moron that can't choose between McDonalds or Burger King let alone something actually important like pro abortion or anti abortion, we just think you're annoying.
>trying to deprive an honest worker of his wage
You're not one of those teens who think the world revolves around himself right?
>Is there anything more pathetic?
You posting the same exact thing for months without even bothering to change it up a bit. At least be creative with your shitposting
Any game with Karma system that only allows you to be Good or Bad is shit and lazy anyway.
>all discounts come directly out of your waiter/chef's wage
have you tried not working at a place run by retards
>Game has "Meaningful Moral Choices(TM)"
>The meaningful choice is really just whether to go full good or full evil, as choosing what you feel to be the correct choice for a given situation will gimp you down the line, because you didn't save up enough good boy/bad boy points
I really wish devs would stop doing this shit.
it's been posted less than a week ago for sure, too
makes me wonder if OP is just a biodrone or a paid shill
90% of Sup Forums is recycled threads at any given time
Yeah because the business owner is probably some evil jew instead of someone trying to provide for their own family as well right?
>whining about people not giving you donations
You're not one of those teens who think the world revolves around himself right?
>Thinking that isn't good motivation for the waiter to be good at their job
If they want more, they will get tipped more for being good at what they do or get a better job
>talking about bargaining for discounts
>MUH TIPS
Yeah you're definitely a teen.
no but he's a retard if he's not able to run enough of a profit that some stickler can't fucking bankrupt him over a hair in his soup
you sound like a weak little cuck, i have been trying to pay less and get more value for things my entire life, and it works.
If they do a shitty job i pay less, hell if i get a cunt for a waiter i will walk out without paying.
You shouldn't be worried about a family not your own.
>Villain is monologing
>Take a shot at him during to bring him down with minimal risk to your team
>RENEGADE POINTS ADDED
K
>simple ethnics
Wow, racist much???
...
No, you're just a weak faggot. grow some balls you pathetic little man.
I don't really care about neutral picks, per say, I just want complex choices. Games like Fallout 3 and 4 and games that use the system in OP's image have very black and white choices where it's either "kill a puppy" bad or "adopt 20 puppies" good. It's boring and not a good system.
>those damn evil jew small business owners how dare they not make enough money to give away to faggots like me
>muh tips
Awww, poor baby. Take it up with your boss.
bait, no one is this stupid. ignore and move on
>blue/green/white is good
>red/black is evil
Can this meme die already? Also is there any examples of the opposite?
I saw it a couple weeks ago. Something's fishy
>no argument left after getting told
Kids these days.
>Nep shit
>CHARACTERS THAT ARE LITERALLY YOU
>Drawthreads that for some reason aren't sent to /vg/ at this point
>WHAT DID HE MEAN BY THIS
>APOLOGIZE
and more
Mad nigger/native american
bait
>BIOSHIT
>RPG.
Pick one.
>strawmanning this hard
0/10 try in another thread
>anything I can't argue against is ""bait""""
Are you even trying to convince me you're not a teen?
You're crying to us about your wait staff job. I'm not sure if that counts for maturity.
Problem is games cant do morality right.
Kill everyone.
The only correct neutral path is doing everything for money.
Not being an edgy "for the evil" faggot or a moral cuck.
Fallout 1,2 and new vegas did neutral correctly.
I literally, LITERALLY just told you the argument was about bargaining for discounts, not "muh tips", and somehow you're so underage that you couldn't even get this.
>kill your mother for money
>not evil
*tips fedora*
>Not using the exploit to max out both, therfore unlocking all dialogue options and being able to actually roleplay
You cucks.
You're not even arguing you're just spitting out memes and saying MUH TIPS
Sush buddy, big boy time, maybe get mummie to make you some tendies?
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
There is no such thing as "good" or "evil." It's just a spectrum of "stupid" and "less stupid." For any given situation, there's usually either an objectively correct choice, or the situation is so fucked up that it could only be the result of several already-stupid previous decisions. But it's a game, and games are about empowerment and feeling like your choices matter, so they have to come up with bullshit contrived scenarios to excuse "equally valid" choices.
Great argument kiddies.
>now that the dust has settled
>le epic thread title in spoilers
>never ever
Etc
You didn't answer his question though.
...
>his question
You arguing for your boyfriend now? Pretty pathetic tbqh.
I just want to be a nice guy who can kill his enemies in badass ways too. Like if I know every one of a specific gang members has to murder someone to join, why would my paragon have a problem shoving him out the window after blasting 50 of them in the face?
>The only correct neutral path is doing everything for money.
You mean a gold driven character like every hacky D&D player makes
>Not being an edgy "for the evil" faggot or a moral cuck.
Pic related, it's you
Ignore the clear bait
@350891025
Don't worry, you're ignored now.
OP is an autist who keeps making the same thread every week.
What does your homophobia have to do with the argument?
Probably as much as tips have to do with an argument about discounts.
In ME Paragon/Renegade weren't even good and evil anyway.
They were:
>Paragon: A Commander Shepard that always strives to do the right thing, regardless of how it may impact the mission or get you or others into danger, you should always do the right thing, regardless of any potential repercussion. Ends don't justify means.
>Renegade: Someone who tries to be as efficient as possible, gets shit done, regardless of how many people you have to stand on to accomplish the task of saving the world, ends do justify means.
It's not like fallout, where a good character gives out free water to homeless people and an evil character nukes an entire town full of innocent people because he can get that sick penthouse apartment.
You're the one who brought it up though.
>GAME has two large factions
>Faction A is a lot like a Democracy, but it's riddled with corruption. Bribery is rampant, the soldiers are disillusioned with war, most people feel free but taxes are a huge problem. Information is uncensored. The people of this faction feel safe from outside threats.
>Faction Z is a lot like a Dictatorship. There is little, if any corruption, the soldiers are loyal and propaganda is distributed widely as the only source of information. The people here describe themselves as free, but it's evident that they live their lives under a watchful eye of secret police. People in this faction do not feel safe from outside threats.
>Faction A and Faction Z are at war due to ideological differences. Faction A has the upper hand thanks to weapon superiority and number of soldiers. Faction Z has more highly trained soldiers, but less numbers and outdated weaponry.
>Faction M is a weapon's manufacturer and distributed. Faction M is governed by 9 elite business(wo)men and 1 "Founder" who decide everything. The Founder has final say in everything, but the 9 elites can override a decision by a vote of at least 7 of 9. Everyone in the faction works, in some capacity, for these elites, though their are chefs, teachers, nurseries, etc. as well. People in this faction enjoy a high value of life, though they don't exactly feel free or safe. Their military has total weapon superiority, but the number of soldiers and quality of their fighting capabilities is not good.
>Faction M has been selling to both A and Z. A recently threatened to stop purchasing from M due to discovering it sells to Z as well. Z requests M to ally with them and crush A together, guaranteeing to split the spoils. A counters by offering to double it's purchase if M stops selling to Z.
>You are the Founder of Faction M.
What do you do, Sup Forums?
You are neutral, aren't you?
It has nothing to do with neutrality but rather that the game shoehornes you into being full paragon or full renegade to unlock the most powerful dialogue options, when in reality it's much more fun to pick and choose who you're a dick to, IE do a racist run where you asskiss humans with Paragon options and dick over aliens with Renegade, or simply alternate for people you like and don't like. The system turns Shephard into a boring, one dimensional character
I fail to see how the description of Factions A and Z is relevant at all. You could literally reduce that whole mess into just the second-to-last point.
but renegade isn't evil
i can't remember where but recently i played a game or watched a movie or something where red was good, and blue was evil...or sth like that
reminded me of star wars but with opposite colours for some reason, i don't remember what it was or what reminded me of SW
Stop selling to both isolate myself building up an army by selling to seperatists and abducting soldiers to fight for me while I manufacture the most powerful military force in the existance to take on both at the same time so that I may rule the galaxy with an iron fist and exterminate all transgenders
All depends on who is winning user.
True Neutral : Balance edition is the only way to play.
Not quite the opposite, but In the game Supreme Commander, the Aeon faction have a green and silver color scheme, and they're genocidal zealots. The Cybran faction is red and black, and they are the least evil faction in the game, as they just want freedom for their brethren (They aren't really the "good guys", though).
It's almost like those colors usually evoke emotions that correspond thematically with those choices
Pink choice=Gay
Yellow choice=Coward
Rainbow choice=Cool weapon
>The choices are bad guys or good guys
>"Heh I'm gonna be a badguy because I'm cool *tips fedora*"
Choices should be 2 sides in a war with no clear morality
People's inherent preference to side with an ideology they see as good or better over one they see is bad or worse?
>And to all you neutralfags, please post some compelling choices (or non-choices) a neutral character could make.
Choosing to flipflop between renegade and paragon choices instead of just pressing the blue button or the red button without bothering to check what it actually says.
Neutrality is shit just make it possible to flipflop without being corralled into a side.
Stop making this fucking thread.
Choices should always be grey morally anyway, no right or wrong.
>Choices should always be grey morally anyway, no right or wrong.
What an odd statement.
Care to justify it?
The problem with it is it forced you completely down one path. You really couldn't opt to go 50/50 because the game would simply lock you out of things if you tried.
The best way to have done is would be not have any checks at all and have it influence your combat; Renegade would make your shooting do more, Paragon make your abilities better or some such.
Devil May Cry 3, MMZ
That's all I can think of
For instance, if there were a hard choice, you should always question your own decision after you finish. Basically I guess i meant make both options seem bad but force the players into a moral dilemma. Makes things more realistic and interesting compared to hey you're good or hey you're an asshat.
>Faction M has been selling to both A and Z. A recently threatened to stop purchasing from M due to discovering it sells to Z as well. Z requests M to ally with them and crush A together, guaranteeing to split the spoils. A counters by offering to double it's purchase if M stops selling to Z.
Do what Sun Ce did: Agree to help both, take the reward for both and help neither.
If there's a charity worker/baby eater option and you're doing a charity worker/baby eater playthrough, you're always going to choose the charity worker/baby eater option. There would be functionally no difference if you just set a your morality flag at the start and the game just proceeded down that route for you.
Morality systems are shit.
No action should have an immediate good/bad response if done reasonably (outside of unreasonable actions like just randomly killing someone).
If I hand a bum on the street $10, yeah I might feel better about myself and can even trick myself into thinking I helped that person out. However, I don't immediately know the repercussions of my action as to what the bum does with that $10. Are they buying food with it, or buying drugs? Are they then going off to better themselves, or are they still there asking for more money?
Hack writers, and developers that just don't care about their story, don't really want to follow up on all the consequences that occur after an action is taken, so they go easy mode with "you're the next coming of Jesus Christ! Gold start for you!"
Honestly telltales the walking dead 1&2 did moral choice really well in my opinion.
Every choice feels like a no brainier until you meet someone else in real life who's also played it and argue about each other's choices and how wrong they are in doing something, that's the benchmark of a game with well made moral choices.
#Kennydidnothingwrong #Dayonefriend #TeamKenny
Sounds like you would have liked the morality system in DA:O.
That too. Both games have one good thing in common in regards to it: It doesn't slap you in the face with its dick and say "WELL THAT'S AN EVIL POINT FOR YOU!"
>Any RPG, or any game for that member.
>Your character creating an empire and conquering the world is a "bad end".
How the fuck is that bad? That's the maximum amount of "winning" you could do in a game.
Fucking Der Langresser.
OP literally posts this thread once a week.
In ME2 I did a full Paragon run save for one time.
Spaceballs.
You forgot
>What are some games where I can X where X is related to the posted pic that is either a lewd furry or some current political event
its just the same fucker bitching about stupid people
Play the Witcher series, particularly Witcher 1, in which the neutral path is overtly canon, but difficult to navigate.
Within the others it is less obvious whether you are playing to a particular morality, being all paths are relatively grey.
Playing through Witcher 2 twice or more is a spectacularly rewarding experience, assuming you remember the story from your previous playthroughs.
For me, it's less to do with a game that allows you to be neutral and more about a game which tracks your moral progress on a bar. Dragon Age Origins almost got it right, with the opinions of party members being the only thing that changes, but then Bioware managed to fuck even that up with the gifting system and just not taking party members who typically disagree with your choices along for the ride, thus creating a nice little fantasy echo chamber to walk around in.
Also, while we are wailing on Bioware, it would be nice if a "good" decision occasionally fucked you over. I would have been shitting my pants with joy of my decision to spare the Rachni actually led to severely negative consequences, but it didn't. Because it never does with Bioware, on the other hand, the eveil options frequently make you feel like shit. Exceptions are Mass Effect 2 were Renegade actually felt somewhat badass and the Dwarf quest in Dragon Age where picking the election fixing asshat actually wind up better for the dwarfs. That is it.
TLDR: If all moral decisions were treated like the Witcher series treats them, the system would be perfect.
>renegade means evil
Please read a dictionary America, your idiocy is showing, again.
>renegade actions and dialogue
>paragon big choices
who /jackbauer/ here?
>ME1
>Paragon and Renegade are more like Idealism and Pragmatism than Good and Evil
>ME2
>Being Renegade gives you evil glowing eyes and volcano scars
>ME3
>Pic related
Of all the stuff they fucked up in the sequels, this is the worst.