Having us kill civilians in Oriath Square is tasteless.

would be funny if we would get a massive xp penalty for killing the civilians. and massive positive xp for saving some karui warriors from the nazis

"

The_Impeacher wrote:

Agree, Vio.

but how to tell your zombies ...

"

The_Impeacher wrote:

Attach the 'Do not attack friendlies' support gem, of course!

Nice. ;)

Honestly, if choosing to kill/not kill were a dynamic implemented consistently throughout the game and the need to make those decisions were somehow justified in the narrative, the Oriath Square portion would be far less jarring. Is that what GGG should have done? In my opinion, hell no. That kind of decision-making is a good match for some adventure games, but it is a horrible match for an ARPG. That's the main reason the argument "Just don't kill them then" is so weak.

We play a lawnmower simulator; not a visual novel with nuanced morals.

What if GGG rename them to "consealed knife carying backstabbing slightly eratic and confused former slave holder citizen"?

Peace,

-Boem-

"

girng wrote:

"

Fruz wrote:

"

Pyrokar wrote:

Ok so you are saying that if you leave them and run through the area it is as good as murdering them since they die from the karui slaves and you do not wanna kill them yourself but the solution is not to make the karui slaves killable so that you can save them?

The solution is to change something to address the issue at hand.

Why the hell does there need to be "frightened citizens" at that very moment to begin with, if it serves no purpose ?
NONE.

Remove them.
Problem solved.

Or rework some of the area, there could be plenty of solutions from there, which do not need to be complicated and very costly.

Adding citizens to the game adds to the player immersion when fighting the boss. You are trying to protect them, if you don't, they die.

okay, that's nice and everything but that doesn't explain why, YOU the PLAYER are considered HOSTILE and can KILL them. if you're there to PROTECT them then why do your minions and abilities kill them?

"

007Bistromath wrote:

The purpose it serves is to demonstrate the consequences of revolution. There will be breakdown, chaos, death, and a revolutionary must choose that to succeed. It is also to show how the power your character has gained has made you distant from humanity; something I would point out to the OP that you do not need to have establishing dialog for at all. You have to take very special care to not destroy them, especially if you took the relatively easy and popular route to the top of having alot of minions.

Their purpose is having no purpose. You get nothing for killing them, nothing for saving them, they are nothing to you. It's not because you're a sociopath, it's because they literally are not beings on the same level as you. Worrying about hurting them is equivalent to how some Buddhists sweep the floor wherever they go so they don't step on bugs.

I'm going to try to make this quick.
Overall : no, sorry but jsut : no.

- showing the consequence of revolution ??? the character has been facing this pretty much all along, no need for stupid badly implemented additional npcs(monsters here) for that

- show that the exile does not belong to 'humanity' anymore ? no
first : it does, there are many other powerful being still considered (somewhat) human
second : everything in this game is about the exile's rise to hancing godlike powers. there is already more than enough of that already.

- they are not on the same level as you ? irrelevant and nonsensical, sorry.
You are still interracting with npcs as a human being, all the freaking way until the end of the game. and even if you were, it does not mean that you need to be a complete sociopath to be powerful (what you were impliying), at all.

"

007Bistromath wrote:

You disrespect the developers' vision simply because it makes you uncomfortable, even though the grotesque remixes of anatomy which were once people just like the ones you're so concerned for didn't give you a twitch.

You don't seemto know what 'respect' means (like many others on the internet tbh)

DONT.DO.THAT
It does not make you look smart
It does not help your argument

The rest of the quote is completely irrelevant.

"

Fruz wrote:

there is already more than enough of that already.

That isn't how art works. When you have an idea you finish it. To do less is either pandering or censorship, depending on which side you've erred.

You have no respect for their vision. I've never been more glad that the devs ignore this forum.

"

007Bistromath wrote:

"

Fruz wrote:

there is already more than enough of that already.

That isn't how art works. When you have an idea you finish it. To do less is either pandering or censorship, depending on which side you've erred.

You have no respect for their vision. I've never been more glad that the devs ignore this forum.

It's hard not to read your statement as "Art is immune to criticism, because to criticize it to disrespect the artist's vision."

Needless to say, such a statement is undefensible. Did you intend to say something more reasonable?

Remember - no Oriathan.

Looking at the civilians you kill in act 5, it's safe to assume they're aristocrats or nobility. This can be gleaned by listening to Lani and how she described her life leading up to the rebellion, plus the zombies you kill in act 6 looking similarly dressed. Besides the templars, the rich and noble are also responsible for perpetuating slavery in Oriath, paving the way for why the rebellion is necessary.

Eat the rich. And if any one of the playable exiles are justified in doing so, it's the Marauder.

"

gibbousmoon wrote:

It's hard not to read your statement as "Art is immune to criticism, because to criticize it to disrespect the artist's vision."

If you treat what somebody has used as a literary device as a "problem" in need of a "solution," as Fruz has, and as you clearly do despite not being explicit about it, what you're doing isn't critique.

When other people see the meaning of something and you don't, continuing to insist it has no meaning is absurdly egotistical. I don't need to explain it, because I've no interest in dancing around somebody who is arguing in bad faith, which I have seen you do with every single post in this thread after the first one.

You (collectively) are trying to make a game developer live up to superficial and restrictive standards of public moral cleanliness, and in the process you outright claim that this game has no meaningful narrative voice. By declaring it lowbrow and voiceless, you render yourself innocent of trying to silence it. I'm sly to this disgusting tactic, and I'd like you to quit.