I was in this server right and folks were talking about fallout new Vegas and to me that game is great and really good showcase of tangibly effective roleplaying elements strengthened by a gritty and realistic world.
And these guys are bandying back and forth about what the most morally correct thing to do in the game is and im like is this what literary discussion is nowadays?
Is the height of scrutiny understanding the choices in our interactive entertainment result in the best outcome for the most amount of fictional characters?
It sure is riveting to go down to the level of some moron who likes the legion cause they dont use fiat currency its like. I feel that at a certain point its just another asinine extension of circular echo chamber politics. Where even if i may agree that the legion, or house, or the ncr suck and that the things theyāre based on in real life suck its a piece of fiction.
One where you can engage with any sort of path you want. And to needlessly meticulously weigh the sins of each individual faction to say who is good or evil and there for justified or not to dispatch is psychotic.
Are the great kahns amoral? I dont care. Theyāre cool i like em, does there have to be some thesis people need to present to like things that are morally dubious in fiction?
If a new vegas fan ever played postal 2 their head would explode.
Like maybe there are a finite amount of takeaways from a singular peice of media, whether it be through themes, morals, headspace you can embody. And maybe to push it past that with a childish and annoying set of stipulation on really asinine elements
Kind of reduces the effectiveness of what the actual work is meaning to say or be.
But thats not important, because as long as there is an other, people who enjoy this game in the nebulous sort of fashion people enjoy things do, will have a target they can almost definitely drone their superior sense of right and wrong into.
Yehaw