He picks neutral option

>he picks neutral option

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=c3ibreRBYBU
youtube.com/watch?v=uyNJZ-2Dod4
twitter.com/NSFWRedditGif

>he picks evil option

>The world is black and white

Lmao imagine being this retarded

Neutral options are often barely fleshed out yea.
The fucking standard binary, dictated morality is fucking terrible and should be changed.

are there any arguments against neutral position apart from badly drawn comics?

>playing games with a binary morale system

>implying you can go neutral on any of those games

I know you can in Fable 2 at least.

It typically makes you come off as a holier-than-thou prick who knows better than to be good or evil, due to each usually having its flaws. True Neutral has been twisted a bit to fit this.

>It typically makes you come off as a holier-than-thou prick
Yeah that's really the impression i get from the OP.

Are there any arguments for having neutral position apart from over exaggerated shit like muh evil is killing babies and good is giving blowjobs

>It typically makes you come off as a holier-than-thou prick

No, it makes you come off as a normal person. It sucks that your family's out on the street, but I have my own stuff to do, it's not my responsibility to buy your dune rhino plate for 5000 credits. And I'm also not so much of a cunt that I'm going to punch you and steal it despite it being worth a pittance, just to be edgy. I'm just gonna say sorry and move on with my day.

Are there any arguments for having neutral position is not caring, which is a very common state for humans.

...

Well that's just it. Neutrals come off that way with little to know backing.

Why does the bad guy think they're better than you? Because fuck you, he's an evil bastard and he's done some nasty things to get where he's at.

Why does the good guy think he's better than you? Likely because it's rare for someone to start out good, and they don't entirely believe you're as dedicated to helping people as you appear.

But what about a neutral character? They either don't care, like , or they try and convince others that being neutral is the ONLY way to win, both of which are shit for a story.

>Not always picking good

Majority of players only play through the game once and they always pick the good option. Developers know this and that's why the good option is always the most fleshed out and interesting.

I flip a coin or roll a dice if there's no obvious benefit either way. Worrying about morality in a virtual environment is gay baby shit for gay babies.

Fable 3 both proves and disproves you at the same time.

Fuck that game.

I thought that most games with morale systems were binary. In Total War your units are either broken or not right? Or do their stats adjust as morale declines?

The bad ends in Bioshock and KotoR felt more satisfying desu.

>which is a very common state for humans.
If your a cynical jaded teenager then yeah

>all the factions suck
>there's no reason not to wipe them out and install yourself as Grand Poobah

...

Technically evil, if you're wiping them out.

>Renegade is enacting the law
I'm triggered.

>they suck if i boil down their motives diwn to a few buzzwords

elite truth

not when they've all been abusing their power and can't be trusted

...

In that case you're good. Congratz.

>not worrying about which choice will create the most ludonarative resonance

It's the way to go in SMT games.

Law is blind obedience, Chaos is might makes right. There must be an alternative.

>being neutral in a game means saving a puppy from a fire and then shooting the kid you gave it back to in the face so you can maintain being in the center of the good/evil axis

>I AM SILLY

Can't really say this arguement has swayed me to be either evil or good, neither is very practical for an individual person, maybe for larger groups in a temporary manner, but as a single individual one path offers deminishing returns and the other is kind of a gamble.

...

>responsibally

WHY DO THESE COPYPASTED THREADS GET A SHITTON OF REPLIES EVERYTIME?

I feel like I'm stuck in an asylum with people with the alz, I'm going crazy.

>save puppy from fire
>fuck you kid, you failed to protect your puppy. my puppy now

It can be the "just doing my job" type.

The judge who saves and hurts innocent based simply on doing his job enforcing imperfect laws falls under this.

Because It worked so well for right? He gave the world bak to the humans only to get stabbed in the dick.

a man walks up to you and asks you what time it is

how do you respond?

>Violently murder him and forcefeed his wife his remains as you rape her in front of his children
>Sell all your belongings to buy him the most expensive watch in existance before getting on your knees and giving him the mindblowing, lifechanging fellatio ever experienced
>Tell him the time

he got stabbed in the dick but his actions still paved the way for Aleph to BTFO YHVH on all routes

First Witcher did neutral pretty well. Choices were - racist humans who live in their own shit, terrorist elves who live in the fucking woods, and you guys are all crazy I'm just trying to get my witcher stuff back.

Playing neutral position in a game comes down to balancing evil and good because balanced is almost never fleshed out?

That's an argument against it, kinda.

Telling him the time would be the good option, as you are providing him with what he asked.

Telling him to fuck off would be the bad decision.

Informing him that you don't have a watch is true neutral.

>neutralfags do things solely for their own self interest
>literally what the bad guys are doing
This is why morality is black and white

>Aleph follows Hero's footsteps and erases the world
It just proves that Neutral is for retards.

>he picks the strawman option

>infamous

>erases the world
the world only gets nuked on the Law route. Neutral and Chaos you stop the Megido Cannon from being fired

what if i dont have a watch

>erases the world
Huh? He doesn't fire the Arc in Neutral

Altruism does not exist.
People who perform good acts do so for selfish reasons.

...

>Not picking options you think are right and not what others think is right
who is brainwashed here?

I do all paths
fite me nerdz

u bich mothr f*ck, i'll succ ur dicc if u dnt tke tht bck

>quest failed

´Good image

>the world is not black or white

well well faggot

I remember playing Fable as mostly a good guy, then at the end I kill my sister to get the cool sword, feel bad about it and do good thing until I get a halo on my head.
People still talked about how I killed her though.

>going back and killing everyone after saving them just to see what happens

Sup Forums is just a CIA groupthink op

Fuck, you are right. I'm misremembering shit.
There's something I didn't like about SMT2 neutral but I can't remember what.

There are millions of users on Sup Forums, chances are hundreds of people haven't seen the thread before. That or people just fucking love getting their shit mixed about things they've seen and yelled at before.

neutral is the one where YHVh gives the baleful speech about how he's gonna reincarnate you again and again just to suffer, in law and chaos he's too busy bagging out Satan/Lucifer respectively for not fulfilling the role he created them for

witchers are neutral by definition, they kill monsters for a living and not get involved in other human or elf conflicts.

>He plays shit games

Life is never as clear cut as being good or evil
It's all gray.

That's not true though, there's plenty of shit that's obviously one or the other.

fapping to traps is gay, that's one thing we know.

But user, if you don't want to suck a feminine penis you're gay!

this a good example of an incorrect opinion

it's got dude genitelia
that's gay

>It typically makes you come off as a holier-than-thou prick
That's good, not neutral.

>No, it makes you come off as a normal person.
No, you come off as a cunt. Some neutralfags seem to have a hard time processing you can still be considered a bad person even if you're not actively doing evil. Normal people would feel guilty about being able but unwilling to help someone desperately in need, as most people consider themselves to be good people (whether it's true or not). Not saints but good people who simply do selfish, perhaps even evil things from time to time because they're imperfect.

There are neutralfags who realize this so try to avoid feeling like a bad person by wanting to do good things they can personally benefit from. The problem is not only that self-interest isn't necessarily good or evil, but one's actions can still be viewed one way or the other. You are also asking the game to take intentions into account along with actions. Should you add consequences as well, now you know why morality systems are usually simple.

there he goe's again
please stop, people might think you're being serious

youtube.com/watch?v=c3ibreRBYBU

>Some neutralfags seem to have a hard time processing you can still be considered a bad person even if you're not actively doing evil. Normal people would feel guilty about being able but unwilling to help someone desperately in need
This logic is flawed as fuck.

Following this logic, you can still be considered a good person even if youre not actively doing good, since you can be able but unwilling to ruin someones life.

Fuck off with this "If you don't help you are just as bad" bullshit. Indifference=/=intent.

>he picks autism option

>mfw Neutral option forces you to kill everyone anyways
Based SMT

>Fuck off with this "If you don't help you are just as bad" bullshit
Stand by while someone bleeds to death without calling an ambulance and explain to the court that you din du nuthin'.

>if you dislike two extremes you're a pseud with a superiority complex
real fuckin sick of this meme paulie

>Following this logic, you can still be considered a good person even if youre not actively doing good, since you can be able but unwilling to ruin someones life.
No because good is active. You can be considered a bad person for choosing to remain passive. You are not "as bad" as a rapist but still bad for not doing anything to assist the victim.

It's all about the power of friendship now.

gosh darn my dude why or how did you manage to find such a random low view re upload of that video
youtube.com/watch?v=uyNJZ-2Dod4
either way dicks arent gay

Sup Forums is fucking filled with retards

>Not going neutral in the SMT games, when both sides either want to remove free will from humanity, or create a world of complete anarchy where humans would be overwhelmed by hordes of demons

I think you have a bad time understanding that just because you are not doing something good doesn't mean you are evil. World is not black and white.

Yes, the law would expect me to help that man, because the law expects me to be good.

I wouldn't be held accountable for making that man bleed to death, I would only be held accountable for not helping him. I'm not evil, I'm minding my own business without actively hurting or helping anyone. The truly evil person in this situation is the one who made the man bleed to death in the first place.

>No because good is active
So according to you good is active, but evil is not? How convenient.

>You can be considered a bad person for choosing to remain passive
Following this logic. Why exactly can't be considered to be a good person for choosing to remain passive? Why can't I be considered good every time I don't punch someone in the face even though I could?

>You are not "as bad" as a rapist but still bad for not doing anything to assist the victim.
No, fuck off. Not playing a hero is not evil. Trying to assist the victim could end up badly for me, with anything from time wasted in courts to getting injured/killed myself.

I swaer you fags are incable of understanding the world is not black and white.

>not wanting to create a world of anarchy

I don't know the name of the source but I remember seeing the same video in a /wsg/ and just looked up on youtube "dude genitelia".
>dicks arent gay
tits or gtfo

>he posts this bait thread every day and people still fail for it

Yes, but not Geralt.

>A world of anarchy where humans wouldn't stand a chance against the demons, and would either become their food, or their slaves

No thanks.

melon XD

IV rips on you and Isabeau for not being satisfied with either of the two options given because it equates it being indecisive, cowardly, having no opinion, etc. After jumping between the two, an alternative appears.
Neither is completely like that in the IV endings.

Better than a world of balance which we fucking live in now.

>call the ambulance
>the save that guy who was bleeding to death
>the guy trurns out to be a huge asshole
>accusses you of being an attacker in hopes of getting money from you

>waste enormuous amounts of time and money proving your innocence
Gee I wonder why someone wouldn't want that.

How evil of me to not care about other people enough to risk my own comfort and well being.

>inb4 unlikely
Still possible, shit like this happens.

>I wouldn't be held accountable for making that man bleed to death, I would only be held accountable for not helping him. I'm not evil, I'm minding my own business without actively hurting or helping anyone. The truly evil person in this situation is the one who made the man bleed to death in the first place.

Neutralfags should be purged.

Stats adjust as morale declines, and on top of that there are two types of broken. :^)