Register a SA Forums Account here!
JOINING THE SA FORUMS WILL REMOVE THIS BIG AD, THE ANNOYING UNDERLINED ADS, AND STUPID INTERSTITIAL ADS!!!

You can: log in, read the tech support FAQ, or request your lost password. This dumb message (and those ads) will appear on every screen until you register! Get rid of this crap by registering your own SA Forums Account and joining roughly 150,000 Goons, for the one-time price of $9.95! We charge money because it costs us money per month for bills, and since we don't believe in showing ads to our users, we try to make the money back through forum registrations.
 
  • Post
  • Reply
tweet my meat
Oct 2, 2013

yospos


Push her. Sucks to be her, but Q-taro probably isn't gonna sacrifice himself and Gin is a child. Fake Reko is more or less human, but killing her is still the lesser evil.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

tweet my meat
Oct 2, 2013

yospos


I don't think that sparing Fake Reko is going do anything but give us the same lovely branch that loving up and running out of time before the fake was outed would, assuming you can actually run out of time and not just get a game over, nor do I think that sparing her means both Rekos get to live. I'm guessing either they kill the doll because she isn't actually human and in the death games so they can do whatever to her, or they permanently replace Reko Prime with her.

I also highly doubt there's any situation where you do nothing at all and still everyone gets to live through some trickery with switching up who gets injected how many times because that would remove the moral choice and sacrifice aspect of the game which seems to be a theme for the main games. I can almost guarantee that at least one Reko is dying either way, and my gut says that there's a version of events where both Reko Prime and Gin/Q-taro die, and a version where just Fake Reko dies, possibly real Reko too, though I would strongly guess that she comes back. I also am going to assume that Sarah is the only one with any real agency to change the situation because as stated before, this is a player choice, and if they just make the same choice for you no matter what you pick then that would be pretty dumb. I'm assuming that the fact that this choice is mentioned as being important in the lp means that it's an actual choice and not two scenes with the same outcome. We could see a situation where Q-Taro musters up the courage to take Gin's place, but that doesn't actually change the situation, just swaps his role for Gin's.

A situation where both Rekos coexisted would be cool to see, but I feel like it's just not in the cards.

All of this is coming from a video game metalogic point of view based on trying to achieve the most optimal outcome which is how I usually approach sudden complex moral choices in games like this, but morally I still think it's the correct choice to push and would also be the most interesting choice for Sara's character development. (I've already voted so this isn't a vote)

tweet my meat
Oct 2, 2013

yospos


The only morally acceptable choice is to savescum to figure out the optimal path.

tweet my meat
Oct 2, 2013

yospos


So I guess the only difference is that Reko would be alive if we pushed the fake? Kinda lame that the people getting executed didn't actually matter at all unless they pull some dumb poo poo where sacrificing fake Reko somehow dooms them to die which would be even dumber. There's not much punch to a moral dilemma if there aren't any consequences or the consequences are just kinda randomly decided.

Maybe it really is a situation where it's just the same result of both Rekos dying no matter your choice which would mean there wasn't actually any point to the whole game, I really hope not.

tweet my meat
Oct 2, 2013

yospos


Akumu posted:

Perhaps the lesson is that consequentialism is not a useful framework for moral decision making when you have no way of predicting consequences.

That's a great lesson to take from it, it's also a really lame and uncompelling way to design a video game based around moral choices.

tweet my meat
Oct 2, 2013

yospos


PMush Perfect posted:

I'm gonna go out on a limb here, and guess that the people who're upset right now thought that by making the right choice, they'd be able to keep everyone from dying. You know that's not how this genre works, friends. :allears:

Edit: At least, that's my Doylian smugness. From a Watsonian perspective, Rio absolutely stepped over the line, you're right. Hm. I wonder if anyone's going to punish him in some way for it.

CountryMatters posted:

Kind of surprised by how many people are angry and bitter that in a Saw-style horror game you can't just use Facts and Logic to manipulate yourself to a perfect ending where everyone goes home safe and gets ice cream

Like, have you ever encountered this genre before?

I'm more upset that the consequences for the choice are pretty much arbitrarily decided and don't have much to do with the actual decision which may as well be made at random. Nobody here thinks there's some hyper optimal outcome where nobody dies and everyone's happy so there's no need to smugly patronize whatever strawman you're talking to.

Consequentialism may be a bad way to judge moral dilemmas in real life, but it's a good framework to make an entertaining and compelling narrative where your choices actually mean something, and if you're not going to have the consequences be related to your decisions then you may as well not even have them.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

tweet my meat
Oct 2, 2013

yospos


I say Kanna. It's a lovely decision either way but she's committed to sacrificing herself for the sake of the group and I feel like this way we have more of a shot at escaping and revealing more of the mysteries surrounding the games as well as the mystery surrounding Sou, Shin, and Alice. I think I'm also past the point of doubting Shin, and I don't think he'll be interested in petty revenge on the group when it was Kanna's choice to sacrifice herself.

Mostly I just think it will be the more interesting choice though.

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • Post
  • Reply