What video game has choices that actually matter?

What video game has choices that actually matter?

Attached: 1522308766257.png (960x720, 226K)

That doesn't make sense.
The one that made the flute gets it because she presumably already owns it. The one with money can offer to buy it, but the market isn't automatic and the creator can refuse.
The poor chick learned a valuable life lesson about how being poor sucks and doesn't entitle you to other people's property.

Alpha Protocol

>three children are arguing over a flute
not
>an entitled artist and a filthy bum are trying to rob someone

>make stuff
>you must give it to someone else
Is this creator a commie or something? There's no implication that the kid sold it or left it somewhere

Now change "flute" to "money generated from publicly traded stocks" and answer again.

Keep the flute for myself as I control the means of production.

>people are entitled to the fruit of my labour because they think they can make more use of it

Really joggles the noggin

>I'm the only one who can play the money generated from publicly traded stocks"
HMMMMMM, REALLY MAKES YOU THINK

CoD Black Ops 2, oddly enough.

of course B
what the fuck is wrong with people even considering options A and C knowing all the possibilities here

Stopped reading at "I'm the poorest". Child B.

why the fuck don't they just share the goddamn flute?

if child b made the flute, why child b doesn't just make 3 flutes?

Yeah, anyone who doesn't pick B is a communist.

why was the (noun) made in the first place?

Which is communist: B or C?

B, unless he's a lying fuck and kids are

>All these B picks
>Not recognising the BLUE hair
That's one quality bait

then the child B and child A stops the production/consuming cycle so no one produces goods anymore. everyone becomes child C eventually. welcome to communism

A and C

>lee kwan yew

Dishonored 1 & 2. The rationalization is also very tenable if you ask me
>btw dont leave a bunch of food for thr carnivorous rats all over the street because they'll multiply heavily

>smiths make swords but are shit at fighting
>keep the swords for themselves anyway instead of giving it to the warrior
>enemy army comes
>smiths get raped cause they suck at fighting and warriors get raped because they don't have swords

t. asukafag

>I'm the only one who has the acumen to actually use this money to innovate new technologies
It's not hard, autist.

B gets it and can choose whether to give it to someone else, not that hard

/thread

A > B > C

Obviously B. It’s her fucking flute. I may ask if she’s willing to share it with A, because the two obviously both like flutes and maybe they could be friends and share their talents.

I would tell C to fuck off. What the fuck is some poor fuck gonna do with a flute? Piece of shit probably plans to pawn it or sell it to a metal dump for heroin money.

>"you would have improved my lot in life immensurably"

shut the fuck up you cant even play the flute

In what country having a flute helps you defend against warriors?

Insufficient information to proceed. Did the girl who made it do so of her own volition or was it commissioned? Was she employed and thus it's the product of a company? Why do I have it and why am I making the choice of who gets it? What relation are these children to me?

Smiths make weapons for something in return, they don't do it for fun
Protection is one of these needs. If child B doesn't give a shit about music, he has no need to give the flute to A. Dumbass

Teach three children to share their shit together, and explain Amartya Sen that context is important factor in any social situation and striping it away only leads to ruin.

Then buy the fucking sword

Attached: 1521016282879.png (252x196, 27K)

Point is, our economy is 99% divorced from the "fruits of labor" logic anyway, so the dumb kids shouting "communism" are wrong.
It has nothing to do with economics, and it's sad that people think that's what justice looks like.

>but the market isn't automatic and the creator can refuse
Unless the buyer claims to be gay, then they'll be forced by the government to accept the trade.

Attached: 1515176757696.jpg (2100x2966, 2.42M)

>being dumb and not knowing that nobles and kings buy swords or simply fund the smiths in the first place to make armor and weapons for the army

>smith makes a sword
>warrior refuses to pay for it
>hurr give it to me for free
that kind of logic is how Africa works and surprise surprise, nobody ever works hard again because greedy cunts steal their shit and never pay

Child C
B can make himself another one and A can buy one from B

>giving
you forgot
>smith sells sword to warrior for market price

>he doesn't know about medieval bard classes

B is the most communist answer on there

A is representative of capitalist society. Consider . The common workers do all the work but it's their higher ups that rake in all the money. B doesn't actually get the fruits of their own labor unless they're self employed, because A "knows how to play it."

>giving stuff for protection is normal
do you work for the mafia?

Is this one of those "I can't make a good argument based on real-world examples so I have to make up a shitty simplified analogy" comics?

I’d tell A to buy the flute from B. Then everyone who matters is happy. We know A can afford it by the fact that there’s a poor person and it isn’t her.

I chose the impossible...I chose Rapture

Attached: download.jpg (299x168, 10K)

The person that can play the flute should get it. We need to encourage creativity in kids, and the kids that makes it is obviously good at that so encourage that kid to keep making things. The poor kid is nothing and should get nothing.

B made it, it’s their flute and they can choose to share it with the others if they wish.

these circumstances lack detail and are mistakenly left for interpretation.

this makes no commentary about the importance of privilege and the necessity to bridge the gap between 'A', 'B', and 'C'--a gap that mostly exists because of a top-down approach to governing. all 3 of these children are majorly disadvantaged in some way.

the richer you are, the easier it is to get richer. see the problem here? choosing any 'single' answer will leave you to be flamed. a multidimensional approach is always more practical if you're considering effective ways to govern a population.

this image also oversimplifies the problem so that any uneducated mother fucker thinks they have a valid opinion. stop blaming the people and blame your local system. it's all rigged and shit like this is made to divide us.

Giving workers rights over the fruits of their labor is communist? This is why teenbros need to fuck off from Sup Forums.

Yes, liberals hate that the real world has nuance and depth and attempt to make all arguments black and white. You support gun ownership? Obviously that means you want school children to die.

Then cunt A needs to buy the fucking flute not just steal it

You can't play music with publicly generated stock, you STUPID IDIOT

+3 speech bonus, duh.

I hope you gain self-awareness someday friend.

>reading comprehension
I'm not that user, but you clearly are the retarded one here.

>Giving workers rights over the fruits of their labor is communist?
It's socialist, but yes.

>b8 pic
>no vidya discussion
FUCK OFF OP, YOUR NIGGER ILK ISN'T WANTED HERE
SAGED AND REPORTED

Can someone edit the picture so C is black? Would make things more realistic.

>Option D: "this one time, at band camp, I stuck a flute in my pussy"

do it yourself you dumb fuck

The flute belongs to the person who made it, what kind of stupid choice is this?

Illusion of Gaia.

Attached: gaiatown.gif (256x223, 21K)

If I paid you to make the flute does it still belong to you?

Did that get taken to the Supreme Court?
Even if it did I wouldn't be surprised. One of our retired Supreme Court judges called for the repeal of the Second Amendment last week.

It's intentionally vague. How is a flute going to improve the life of C if he doesn't play it. If he's too poor to afford a flute, he's too poor for lessons. It's a cockamamie scenario.

>. You support gun ownership? Obviously that means you want school children to die.

to be fair most crotchspawn are oxygen thieves who talk in cinemas and watch letsplays

B obviously. Fuck those other two commies.

all three of the kids seem cute
so I would just buy each of them their own flute

I kinda get the argument of A if it wasn't a flute, like if B owned something beneficial but was squandering it, but in the example is just a flute, so B gets it.

???

So you finished reading? Cause that's where I also stopped, because it was the last child.

these are your kings for tonight, say something nice about them

No, the ownership was decided before the product was made
In this case there's usually a contract that shows the ownership

>One of our retired Supreme Court judges called for the repeal of the Second Amendment last week.

SHALL
NOT
BE
INFRINGED

>B > A > C
If payment were involved and B wanted to sell it, and therefore weren't involved, I'd go
>A > C
C is a parasite and should go and make his own thing

Which is a crucial detail we are lacking in this scenario.

>Yes, liberals hate that the real world has nuance and depth and attempt to make all arguments black and white.
This can go the other way too.
You support gun regulation? Obviously that means you want to ban all guns.

Kek.

Well B gets it of course. We can assume she didn't sell it, and even though she can't play it she made it for SOME reason. Whether or not it is shared is her decision.

Attached: police.png (434x443, 170K)

Damn socialists

No user, because you paid him to make you a flute, which is a contractual transaction and contracts are enforced by law.

>write book so someone can read it
>faggot snotty illiterate little shit takes it away from me because we wuz kangz n sheeeeit
>he shits on it

>a bait image lacks information
color me fucking surprised

The flute belongs to the strongest one

In all fairness the left now does admit that they want to ban all guns.

Have you read what he wrote?

Because child C can't afford a flute and for all we know A might not either. Could've spent all her money on flute lessons.

Besides, it's not like A will give B a share of any money she makes from her flute recitals.

How is it bait?
>lacks information
A sane person would assume that such a contract doesn't exist, if it isn't mentioned.

Anything other than B means that you are a monster

Child A obviously

>go with B
>make hundreds of flutes and waste the resources on it (flutes are made of wood) and there's just a pile of flutes lying in the corner being wasted and no one plays them cause no one can play them so it's just wasting resources for nothing

But we know B doesn't have it any longer because I am deciding who gets it. Some transaction has taken place and we need to understand that.

C makes me so mad. There are millions of people just like that. Giving nothing and expecting things in return.

There is only one solution, break the flute into three parts divided amongst the three equally

Attached: 1491717542463.png (700x651, 765K)

Do they? Any examples of this from major activists, not some random pink hair on twitter?

Shove it deep up my ass and say: "Whoever retrieves it owns it

Child B lol, wtf is this, Baby's First Communism?

Why did child B make a flute they can't play?
Why does child A, who can play the flute, not already have one?
If Child C is so poor and miserable, why are they wasting their time arguing over a homemade flute made by a child which presumably has no monetary value?
Seems to me all these fuckers are lying and the flute is stolen. I confiscate it on behalf of the state and execute the three thieves for their trouble.
That'll teach 'em.