Both are bad.
2 Likes
That’s how I usually interpret it. I just assume the author meant they’re traditionally appealing and objectively fitting societal standards, even if personal taste may vary.
9 Likes
It’s usually not the gender I attracted with (Female RO), at least give a choice to ignore them or acknowledge it and move on. I don’t have to be a simp when interacting with them, I even want to give a poker face especially if they are god/goddesses level attractiveness, give me a break.
3 Likes
A particular variant exists in Dishonored where they say you can play either stealthily or loudly and decide whether to kill or not but then not being a sneaky pacifist gets you the bad ending even though the people you kill definitely have it coming.
4 Likes
You can kill all your targets and still get the good ending. You just can’t go murder happy on every guard you see even then you can still kill quite a few before going into high chaos
6 Likes
I think Dishonored handles it pretty well, actually. There aren’t necessarily “good” or “bad” endings, but rather “High Chaos” and “Low Chaos”. As is stated in their names, one ending (where you go largely loud and lethal) results in a large amount of chaos in Dunwall, while the opposite (largely stealthy and non-lethal) results in the opposite.
Especially with the rat plague, where more dead bodies = more rats = more plague situation that Dunwall is going through, lethal vs non-lethal having differences does make sense within the context of the game’s world. A dead body is a dead body, regardless of if they “deserve it” or not.
The game doesn’t “punish” the player for their actions in the traditional sense. Aside from the ending in Dishonored 1 where Emily doesn’t get rescued, Corvo still accomplishes what he sets out to do.
10 Likes
Your targets may have it coming but random guards who are just doing their jobs don’t. If there’s a masked psycho going around the city killing hundreds of people during a plague, there’ll be chaos.
7 Likes
More specifically, if someone or something else conveniently bumps off your target, and you totally had no input on it (except for the part where you have to engineer each “accident”), then it doesn’t count as your kill, and, somehow, the plague doesn’t spread.
In particular when they’re the kind of snobby bitch who knows they’re hot and all but expects you to simp for them so that they can relish in it. Yeah, sorry, I don’t find self-centered narcissists to be sexy, what can I say?
I’m fine with hard requirements, but like @Necrosian said, it’s when the author expects me to know that I must exactly perform steps X, Y and Z, even though it’s likely my first time even touching the game and therefore I would have no idea to even expect that, that I find fault with it. Don’t tell me I can do something and then set it up so that it’s utter bullshit to accomplish unless I metagame it and code dive to even get there, is what I’m trying to convey, here.
Bit of column A, bit of column B. Like I said, I get the intent behind it, the author’s trying to inform you that this character is romanceable, so they want to convey that this character looks good, I understand that. But when it’s written as you, the MC, thinking that someone is “objectively sexy,” and there’s no other context clues to inform you of why you suddenly think that, then it comes across as the author trying to force my character to feel a certain way, even if it goes against my choices thus far, and that’s not cool.
Plus, you know, like I said: Beauty is subjective. Slapping the word “objective” on something that cannot be objectively quantified is silliness.
Depending on how much I hate the people I’m pissing off, I dare say that might even be easy mode!
3 Likes
It’s also total bullshit that us killing people is causing that much plague spread. Sure, sometimes people make comments about videogame players killing so many enemies that a country’s population is affected or smth but the way they tried to make it cannon here is stupid. Not saying it CAN’T be done, but they didn’t do it right.
But seriously, I know like two games that did encouraging pacifism right. Undertale and MAYBE Iji and that last one was still very dodgy.
I think the ending where tons of sympathetic characters die of plague that would live otherwise and everyone calls you a monster (and one guy literally alerts the soldiers to you because he hates you for, you know, fighting the revolution, like to see him do it himself if he’s so smart) and Emily becomes a ruthless tyrant counts as punishing a playstyle, especially since a pacifist run involves not using the fun combat mechanics that are more engaging than the stealth powers. Giving the bad ending for a playstyle counts as punishment.
And sure, a dead body is a dead body, but THEY MADE IT THAT WAY. The devs SET IT UP so that they could punish you. It’s the Thermian argument (a term coined by Dan Olson about some videogame, usually the argument is about sexism, but it applies to lots of things). Using the in-universe justifications for something complained about to deflect criticism. It’s a fallacy bc the author made it that way to include the element and the complaint was that the element was either objectionable or in this case, not enjoyable. No amount of in-story justification will make it FUN.
It’s also known as the “I breathe through my skin” argument, a term coined by Jim Sterling about Hideo Kojima’s justification for making the character Quiet from MGS5 scantily clad (said explanation contradicts cannon). I also hate sexual fanservice btw.
I also resent the idea that creating “chaos” is inherently a bad thing. It’s a revolution ffs, it inherently creates chaos! The idea that any revolution with a just cause automatically “goes too far” once chaos ensues is yet ANOTHER trope I hate because it implies that maintaining the awful status quo is preferable to temporary chaos. Fact is, sometimes you need a little temporary chaos to overthrow the tyrants so things can actually improve. The rebels are not automatically worse than the evil overlord or just as bad because their methods aren’t squeaky clean. No successful revolution has EVER been squeaky clean. That’s just how it works.
3 Likes
Giving the bad ending for a playstyle counts as punishment.
My point is that there isn’t one ending that’s inherently “bad”, nor is there one that’s inherently “good”. Sure, it could be argued that the lethal playstyle (especially in the first game) was far better implemented and designed than the non-lethal options, but combat overall was a bit janky in 1, so I wouldn’t put that much stock into it being designed intentionally bad or anything.
I also resent the idea that creating “chaos” is inherently a bad thing. It’s a revolution ffs, it inherently creates chaos! The idea that any revolution with a just cause automatically “goes too far” once chaos ensues is yet ANOTHER trope I hate because it implies that maintaining the awful status quo is preferable to temporary chaos. Fact is, sometimes you need a little temporary chaos to overthrow the tyrants so things can actually improve. The rebels are not automatically worse than the evil overlord or just as bad because their methods aren’t squeaky clean. No successful revolution has EVER been squeaky clean. That’s just how it works.
I agree, especially in a situation like in Dishonored 1, that chaos isn’t necessarily a bad thing. However, it’s not as simple as rebels vs The System ™. The rebels did jailbreak Corvo from his execution, but it’s later revealed they’re using him as a tool to clear the way for their own ambitions to rule through Emily.
7 Likes
Although, Corso does kinda bust through that scheme in, like, two seconds once he finds out. Hell, by that point in the game, whatever fight the actual villain could have put up is heavily neutered by Corso just being that good by the time he tries anything.
1 Like
One thing to consider here is that Corvo isn’t a revolutionary. Corvo’s literally trying to re-establish the monarchy, which is as anti-revolutionary as objectives can get. He’s a counter-revolutionary. He’s not fighting against the system alongside the rebels. He’s the old guard of the system fighting to reassert itself.
That aside, if you kill enough people for a High Chaos run, most of those kills are just Corvo murdering people that are in the way of his revenge simply because they committed the crime of being in the way of his revenge. The violence isn’t the unfortunate and unavoidable consequence of bringing about change. It’s a choice made because murdering his way from point A to point B is slightly easier/more fun/faster/etc than the alternatives.
14 Likes
It’s the same difference. You’re deposing a dictator who started the whole plague in the first place.
It’s almost as if this is a game, meant to entertain.
How is the High Chaos option not bad?
1 Like
It’s different here because the things Corvo smashes on his way to his goal are his things. This isn’t a case where the revolution overthrows the government and raises up its own army officers and it’s own city guard and structures. Emily is going to need all those things in good condition when she’s back in power.
All the damage he causes on his way to restoring Emily to the throne is damage he’s going to have to try to repair after she’s seated on it again. If he gets there by murdering a huge chunk of the city and terrifying everybody, they’re going to have a hard time dealing with the aftermath of that.
13 Likes
Ok but none of that changes the fact that nonvolence in this game just isn’t very fun.
1 Like
Well, unless you’re a stealth game junkie, but I’m not, and have never been good at stealth games to begin with (dude, I can barely strategize in Fire Emblem, you expect me to not only strategize, but do so without getting caught? That’s just not happening), so that’s kind of off the table for me. (No but really, the stealthiest I’ve ever been is successfully sniping six Nazis at extreme range in Sniper Elite before my position got triangulated and the entire base alerted. I’m not good at stealth, man.)
I do like what Dishonored 1 tried to do, what with the plague and Corso’s loyalty to the late Empress and her surviving daughter incentivizing the player to be merciful as much as possible and only target the actual guilty parties, but when you give the player superpowers and then turn around and tell them that roughly half of those superpowers can’t be used unless they want the bad ending to the game, it kinda stings, not gonna lie.
1 Like
Ah, so it’s when what follows doesn’t follow logically from what you did? So it’s less “you abused your sidekick → they left, and now you need to go without backup (because everyone is busy elsewhere)” and more “you drank coffee in the morning and don’t have exactly 75% in cunning → the villain wins (because… they have very strong feelings about tea and quarters)”? If so, then I understand what you mean, finally. 
Sorry about that, heatwave must be affecting my cognitive processing.
8 Likes
No worries, I tend to write things in a rush in order to keep from forgetting them later, so I sometimes don’t write what I mean how I mean it.
2 Likes
Like i said you can still kill your targets along with quite a lot of guards without getting a bad ending if you don’t kill civilians so i wouldn’t say that the game is trying to encourage pacifism just thinking about who you kill and how. Also quite a few of the non lethal takedowns for the targets still ends with the them dying a painfull slow death or just dying which I wouldn’t exactly call pacifism
https://www.reddit.com/r/dishonored/comments/c3ohb6/how_many_people_can_you_kill_in_the_first/?utm_medium=android_app&utm_source=share
4 Likes
Like @Nm6k said, the game leaves players room for mistakes. Some areas are hard to pass stealthily and you might be forced to fight your way out of encounters. The game doesn’t punish you for that. Any high-chaos playthrough I’ve done, it was by choice. It never happens accidentally.
Dishonored 2 is even better in that aspect, being spotted doesn’t mean you have to kill: It’s possible to choke enemies unconscious even during combat, you have sleeping darts and howling bolts, almost all of Emily’s powers can be used both lethally and non-lethally.
I’ve done both high-chaos and low-chaos playthroughs for both games and enjoyed seeing the world, characters and Emily’s/Corvo’s personality change depending on your actions.
All in all, I really like the chaos mechanic.
9 Likes