>Those people that go "REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE I WANT TO BE NEUTRAL! WHY DOESN'T THIS GAME ALLOW ME TO BE NEUTRAL!!?!?!? REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE" in an RPG
Is there anything more pathetic?
And to all you neutralfags, please post some compelling choices (or non-choices) a neutral character could make.
>want choice in a role playing game
>I'm in the wrong
OP is a fag.
>>339185287
Pick a better game oP
>>339185287
Are you implying your average paragon/renegade option is compelling rather than retarded/edgy
>>339185417
>wanting to pick the betafag options
>>339185417
The Witcher games are really the only RPGs I've ever played that did it right. There's none of that "You did thing A! That makes you good! Oh you did thing B! Now you're kinda evil!" or "CHOOSE THIS CHOICE IF YOU WANT TO BE GOOD OR THIS CHOICE IF YOU WANT TO BE BAD" horseshit.
Honestly those things just defeat the whole purpose of giving you the choices.
>>339185287
>He feels the need to has his choices validated by having big shiny blue/red words and numbers appear on screen
You sound like a tremendous cake boy, OP.
I take it you never played a megaten game then
When fire burns is it in conflict or does it exactly what its supposed to do
>Is there anything more pathetic?
people that type like op
>>339185287
It's not so much that people want to be neutral it is the fact that if you don't fucking go hard into one path or the other you're fucked.
>You have been a pretty good person during most of the game
>You finally get that one annoying asshole on their knees in front of you
>Either you do the good thing and let the asshole go or you put down the fucker like the dog he is.
>You kill the bitch
>"OH NO! YOU DID A BAD THING NOW YOU DON'T GET SWEET ANGEL SUMMONING POWERS AND YOU CAN'T GO EVIL TO GET THE SICK ASS HELLFIRE BLAST POWER EITHER"
https://boards.fireden.net/v/search/filename/paragon%20or%20renegade.jpg/
Is there anything more pathetic than posting the same exact thread 10 times? Try to be original, OP. No one reply seriously to this thread please.
>>339185287
>don't want to kick puppies and eat babies, nor do I want to bend over and take it up the ass from everyone I meet.
>somehow in the wrong.
Fallout New Vegas, Strange Journey, SMT IV and Devil Survivor had good neutral routes.
Give a big fuck you to both sides then kick both their asses and stand victorious and independent.
Problem's that the game usually just gives you the choice between whiteknighting or going full dickhead mode. Where's my option to not be a fucking retard?
>>339186334
>New Vegas
>Good neutral routes
???
it's not that people want to be contstantly neutral you utter moron it's that people want to be paragon in some situations and renegade in others
>>339186439
House, Wild Card
They both end up with Vegas on its own instead of in the hands of NCR or Legion
>>339186437
>Where's my option to not be a fucking retard?
Okay you neutralfags say this - but you never quantify what exactly you'd want.
Writing for you fence sitters is fucking annoying
>you get told apathy is death
>>339186557
>good writing is fucking annoying
Lawful Good and Chaotic Evil are the most boring and common alignments
>>339185287
shitposting mass effect thread?
shitposting mass effect thread
>>339186517
>house
>neutral
no
>>339185287
I hate that system because it doesn't allow me to be devilish. If you pick renegade then you have insane autistic outbursts for no reason.
>>339186715
But they give you instant player agency and gratification rather than having to scratch your head and make a bad decision cause you don't know everything about the situation
![w4qi4ky[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/wVSLldy.jpg "w4qi4ky[1].jpg")
>>339185287
>And to all you neutralfags, please post some compelling choices (or non-choices) a neutral character could make.
Telling god and lucifer to fuck right off.
>>339186172
mass effect was unvelievably condescending jesus christ
![latest[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/wClatJA.jpg "latest[1].jpg")
>>339185287
>good: a bunch of self-righteous fags that impose their view on everyone and (secretly) sneer at everyone from their ivory towers
>bad: a bunch of bitter sour cunts that disturb everyone with either their edginess or general autistic rudeness
>neutral: a bunch of aimless eunuchs who can't commit and just want things to stay the same. Still not a bunch of rude assholes or preachy faggots, but there is no progress or real change
>hidden true neutral mode: punch god and lucifer in the dick and live innawooods in peace forever
who else /neutral/ here
>>339185287
>ME3
>RPG
people still don't understand what RPG means?
>>339185287
Ok
>hero dude, help me please
>A: sure I'll hep you kind sir
>B: whatever, if I feel like it
>C: go fuck yourself
>There will never be a game in which neutral isn't shoehorned into being evil
Seriously, in every fucking game with a karma system, choosing the self-serving or pragmatic option is ALWAYS evil.
>Oh you want a reward for saving our town, here's 50 gold and 100 badboy points
>You decided to not forgive the bitch who betrayed you and almost let the villain conquer the galaxy? 1000 badboy points enjoy your evil ending :)
Just fuck off with that.
How fucking hard is it to make a karma system where;
Good = life affirming, no tangible rewards
Neutral = self-serving
Evil = the easiest path
If your shitty game has a karma system then obviously you intend for people to play through it multiple times, so it's not like you can say "but then Good playthroughs can't get everything".
I achieved to fill both Renegade and Paragon bars on the same playthrough.
WHY ARE PEOPLE REPLYING SERIOUSLY TO THIS THREAD?
IT'S FUCKING OBVIOUS BAIT. HE'S POSTED THIS SAME THREAD SO MANY TIMES NEARLY EVERY DAY.
STOP.
![maxresdefault[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/8JWuDXq.jpg "maxresdefault[1].jpg")
>>339187315
>not wanting to end the cycles of conflict and return to nothingness.
If it's not White, it's not right.
>>339186784
House's agenda hinges around the complete rejection of the NCR and Caesar's Legion, the two most powerful opposing powers in the region.
House definitely takes a stand, but in the grand conflict that drives the entire narrative of New Vegas, he's neutral.
>>339185287
This is how you neutralfag correctly.
>>339187510
>1000 badboy points
GIVE ME MY FUCKING TENDIES
I was a Jerk with a Heart of Gold.
>is there anything more pathetic?
Maybe.
I hate it more how in most WRPGS these days they push so much more for you to be "good".
>Well thank you for making the right choices the whole way along and not being selfish.
>Even though it's incredibly more profitable and self-serving to be good, anyway.
I wish neutral involved making the 2 sides have peace with one another and not "I'm against both"
>>339186334
SMTIV's "Neutral route" is a joke.
>Give a big fuck you to both sides
No you just have to alternate doing lawfaggot shit and edgelord shit, it's a horrible game.
Easy.
>Support idealistic but imperfect side A
>Support morally ambiguous but efficient side B
>Tell both to go fuck themselves and solve everything on your own
>Make peace with both and cooperate towards a common benefit
All games with karma systems should be required to have 'neutral points' as a mechanic.
Every time you do something that isn't motivated by good or evil should drag you back to neutral.
>Did you kill that dragon because he was evil? Or are you sure you didn't just want the experience points and his magical sword; not good.
>You completed a job for someone instead of killing them and taking their stuff because you knew the reward for completing the quest was bigger; not evil.
You wanna be good? You better be good all the time.
>>339187880
It's only that way because the other sides are faggots that can't agree so you get caught in the middle.
I don't think either side can agree if it's:
A: Religious or moral See: Chaos and law faggots
B: Different goals. For example, stealing lots of money vs. stopping people from stealing lots of money
C:Too much effort to write
>current year
>being a neuter-fag
>>339188160
How in the fuck would you measure player motivation like that? Playing a straight mercenary, dialoguewise like that would be boring as all fuck.
>>339187993
You're wrong there. The rational and "edgelord" choices alternate between chaos and law. Following them is likely to land you on neutral.
>>339187624
Except he sticks his nose into a ton of places it doesn't belong to be a good Witcher goy
>>339185921
but one of the main themes in the witcher games is that no matter how much geralt wants to stay neutral he ends up with no choice but to take a side.
>>339185921
Everybody shits on Fallout 4, but they did this fairly decently
>>339188320
Sure, but he is allergic to people telling him to choose a side.
>>339188290
It's an option, someone is going to use it. I can't see myself using it all the time but it'd be nice to have if the other two options are retarded.
>>339188521
Not really
>>339188315
Not really, it's basically impossible to do without a guide because so many of the choices are so arbitrary. SMTIV is probably the worst alignment system ever made. And it doesn't even affect your gameplay like in other SMT games because it's faggy casualized shit too.
Divinity Original Sin has my favourite morality system. It doesn't force you into archetypes, it allows for the most freedom and creativity, it reflects actual gameplay choices and makes for fun and interesting roleplaying/character building.
My only complaints are that it's too often too ambiguous. If you don't have traits be determined by virtually every interaction, give me some indication when those crucial interactions are happening. And tell me what personality traits are being modified, it's very hard to tell if for example a statement is supposed to be compassionate, forgiving or considerate.
>>339188638
side with
> the dumb evil assholes
>the dumb assholes
>the dumb assholes
>or the dumb nignog
Seems fairly neutral to me.
>>339188914
and in the end none of that matters
true, a neutral story
>>339188770
Too bad it's tied to the atrocious rock-paper-scissors social combat system and exists only to min-max character builds.
Neutral is the only true "good" path
Neutral is the path for a real human
There is no such thing as an absolute good, or absolute evil.
Absolute good would mean sparing and helping anyone, no matter how evil they are, therefore you are being evil yourself for allowing them a chance to continue their evil deeds. This is a paradox.
Absolute evil would mean being a dick to ALL LIFE, therefore you'd even have to stomp the fucking flowers and burn the oceans.
If you were absolutely evil, you'd literally have to kill yourself like a jihad bomber, except you wouldn't do it for fame, god or any other bullshit.
Even fucking Breivik had a reason for what he did, his own ideals. His victims were enemies to him, he wouldn't have killed indiscriminately. He knew exactly what kind of people were gathering on that island.
for example:
jrpg "evil" is always either edginess or the villain's own vision of justice
jrpg "good" is always the "if I kill him I'll be just like him" bullshit
TLDR:
There is no ULTIMATE evil/good
Neutral is the realist's choice who does things while considering outcomes.
Neutral is like a trader, who is willing to bend to either side in name of profit while still maintaining morals
>>339188770
>it's very hard to tell if for example a statement is supposed to be compassionate, forgiving or considerate.
Only badly written games have this problem
>>339189659
look at this faggo dealing only in absolutes
>>339189689
That's not true. An example:
A man steals food to feed his straving children. You catch him. Is letting him go compassionate or forgiving?
The answer is, it's both. So if you want to make it count only for one (like in the game), there should be some indicator telling you just what trait exactly is being modified.
>>339185287
Neutral is objectively the best alignment.
>Going paragon
>Nobody must die, he have to plant flowers and trees on the way, and every enemy killed goes to charity
>Going renegade
>FUCK YOU, FUCK MY CREW, I'M KILLING YOU AND ALL OF YOU. Sincerely, your prom date, you fucking faggot.
I wonder why.
>>339188221
So give me the edgelord idiot version of neutral.
Let me take on and kill everyone on both sides. Dumb as it may be it'd be the closest I can get to a boss rush mode nowadays.
Why aren't you Lawful Good?]
You don't want to be purged, do you?
>>339190019
Chaotic Good > Lawful Good
Lawful Evil > Chaotic Evil
>>339185287
>as a teenager
>choose the good guy choices 100% of the time in vidya because they just feel right
>as an adult
>choose the asshole choices more often because sometimes the good guy choice comes with consequences that don't outweigh the benefits
>>339190019
>this triggers /tg/.jpg
>>339185287
I just prefer to play a game that doesn't box me into some bullshit good/evil paradigm. Anyone got any suggestions for games like that?
>>339188417
Yeah but opposed to mass effect those sides aren't pigeonholed into being good or evil.
>>339187993
I kind of agree with this. Neutral seems like balance but really you're expected to be all over the place. A lot of the Chaos options are honestly pointlessly edgy and selfish things to do and many people would be Law if they weren't scared from it.
Also based on the game, I don't get the gripe against the Law and Chaos endings. They were extremes but were very rewarding as far as getting what you want.
>>339185287
What I hate about bioware games is after the first choice you they may as well give you no other choices.
You are pretty much locked in to whatever morality your first choose if you want the proper bonuses
>>339188770
>tfw played with a friend and had fun with it
>left mid-way because exams
>thye announce EE and he felt pissed about he won't play it
>tfw still hasn't found a bro who want to play it
Playing OS alone feelsextremely depressing.
>>339190106
Neutral good>>>everything else
>>339193936
I think you misspelled chaotic-good.
It's okay, I'll forgiveyou after you flagellate yourself
>>339194475
>Guts
>Good
Wanting a neutral path in everything is pretty fucking retarded, but nowhere near as annoying as those faggots who always go
>why can't I fuck both sides over and become emperor of the world
>>339193936
Chaotic Neutral is the only right choice.
>>339189659
>Absolute good would mean sparing and helping anyone, no matter how evil they are
Pretty sure Plato btfo that logic early in The Republic.
>>339194727
He's a great judge of character and only swings his sword at people who deserve it or are clearly not fighting for his good cause. I'm talking about post-eclipse Guts, ofcourse, since he was pretty neutral before shit going down.
As a neutralfag, I have no strong opinion on this one way or the other.
![185665[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/1P2Inys.jpg "185665[1].jpg")
>>339195234
>why can't I fuck both sides over and become emperor of the world
>No wanting to do that
I captured the castle, I should keep the castle. Stupid king.
neutral is the true manchild path. it's for the kind of stunted adult that never had to learn the lesson that no matter what you do, someone will still be upset, and that trying to fencesit to avoid blame only makes it worse for everyone.
>>339195851
way to bend the meaning of "neutral" to something else entirely
Neutral people look after their own* benefit, no more, no less
*family & friends included
>>339196072
>I just want to be a dispassionate farmer cuck who makes no contributions to the world either good or bad
>>339185287
Neutral is just ignoring the two options
>>339185287
Pacifist faggots are waaaaay worse.
>>339189171
You can just pick an AI for your companion that won't fuck with you, m8.
>>339196134
Then how do you make a game without conflict?
>>339195851
It's not about pleasing everyone, it's about being a real fucking person. Every person is complex and nuanced.
Just because you're autistic and don't understand that everyone has different emotions and feelings towards everything doesn't mean that's retarded.
>game tells me to kick cat
>dont
>WOW UR A GOOD GUY
being a true RPG isn't about being good vs. evil, it's about being a dick to someone and fucking them over because you don't like them or helping someone because you want to.
>>339196440
>I have an opinion
>I disagree
>Let us duel
>>339196526
It's more
>I have an opinion
>I disagree
>Let us duel
>I'm a neutral cuck who will watch these two fight cause I have no opinion one way or another
>>339185287
>Paragon
"Ok you convinced me. I will donate $500 to charity"
>Renegade
"Ok you convinced me. I will donate $500 to charity and all slide you an extra $200."
>Neutral
"Ha, well I guess i'll just donate $500 to charity since neither of you know what to do."
>>339196130
Farmer? more like a fucking badass renegade who does AS HE PLEASES, not as the rule book says.
>>339196625
>more like a fucking badass renegade who does AS HE PLEASES
Which is apparently nothing
Neutralfags probably watch their wives getting fucked cause "this is neither good nor bad"
>>339196587
You have a very limited viewpoint of things, don't you
>>339185287
ME's system wasn't good or bad though, it was either being a pussy or being a dick, which is fine.
Good/Evil systems however kinda suck unless they have some meaning to it such as actually being the bad guy when making "evil" decisions.
Well thats just my opinion anyway what to I know
>>339186671
Good thing I don't care.
>>339185287
I just want to play a character that strives for maximum benefit for everyone without being a complete fucking bitch.
Sometimes helping people requires you you to serve a beatdown or showing that you are not to be fucked with, but without going full edgelord.
Being 'neutral' is literally for fedora tippers
>I didn't pull the drowning child out of the pool, I just remained neutral
>I didn't help the woman getting raped in an alley, I remained neutral and went about my day
I mean, what is the "TRUE NEUTRAL" thing to do?
>>339197035
Do what you think is best.
>>339196679
>fighting just for a personal cause
>cuck
uh huh,
you sound like a faggot alright.
>Look mom I posted it again
>>339197035
Memes
>>339197150
Quoting the wrong person?
I just want to do whatever the fuck I want without having to be a minmaxing shitlord
>>339196072
that's not neutral then. being a self-serving prick is generally on the evil side of things.
did you ever feel dumber than that time you thought you'd make a stand in a video game and didn't do the main quest because "your character wouldn't take part in this shit" and then you just sat there staring at the questgiver contemplating what the fuck you were doing?
>>339185287
Paragon
Using D&D's alignment for non-fantasy settings is silly since evil is a rather tangible thing. The setting has entire species whose being is filled with malice that exist to just fuck shit up
>>339188417
That's what makes them compelling. It's just like real life
> some NPC aboot to be attacked
> PC walks in on it
> all the attackers turn toward PC observing reaction
> PC chooses not to intervene and walks away
NEUTRAL
>>339195234
>he doesn't like the wild card ending
>>339197631
>Kill attackers
>Ask to get paid for your service
Still neutral
>>339197714
>>Ask to get paid for your service
That's like asking a woman you saved from being raped to have sex with you
Pretty evil
>>339185287
>Say JRPGs don't count as RPGs because you don't have choices
>Game basically punishes you for not picking the same color coded choice every single time essentially killing all roleplaying potential
Bravo.
>>339197863
>That's like asking a woman you saved from being raped to have sex with you
I feel like i did this at some point in the witcher series
>>339197035
Neutral doesn't mean you don't do good, it means you outweigh the goods and the bads when making your decision.
It's not just "no risks if no reward" attitude.
More like "Is it worth it?"
>>339197297
So you're saying it like it's evil to survive? fuck off.
OH SHIT. There's a burning house, you don't know if there's anyone inside, what do you do?
a) Dive in to the flames without a care for your own safety just because you fear people are in danger
b) Fuck it, you don't know if there are people and you don't want to risk dying yourself
c) throw rocks at the firefighters who arrive 5 minutes later
Any smart person would choose B, even if there was a flailing lady in the window
I don't want neutral, I want real fucking choice.
Let's face it, in games like Mass Effect, the first choice you make is the choice you make for the entire game. If you go with Renegade, you'll always go with Renegade because that's the only way to get full content, same with Paragon.
I just want to be able to choose what I think is the best option at the time without the game bitching at me.
Mass Effect 2 was the worst case of this, because if you didn't go full renegade/paragon you simply couldn't get the full ending because "lol fuck you".
Fuck binary moral choice systems, just present options and let people deal with whatever consequences result from those choices.
>>339197863
Your analogy is not neutral and extremist. Average day to you, sir
>>339198074
>I just want to be able to choose what I think is the best option at the time without the game bitching at me.
Okay that's fine, but neutralfags want nonsensical nonchoices
>>339198290
I want more choices than "pet the puppy" or "kick the puppy into the sun"
>>339188748
I want to disagree, but the Jonathan/Walter route thing really fucked up the point balance
I can forgive lack on gameplay influence though, due to the amount of exclusive bosses in each route. Nocturne didn't really even have routes that mattered and SMT SJ's lock came way too late in the game for it to really matter.
>>339198417
Then your choice is
>Don't pet the doge (and don't kick it into the sun)
>The doge is unpleased
>>339198480
That's neutral and makes perfect sense.
>>339198480
This is why ME's dialogue wheel is garbage
>>339198417
You could just not talk to the puppy. Go full true neutral and be a hermit and interact with no one.
>>339198586
How is that a fun player choice to make?
>>339198636
I swear to fuck, this thread is filled with samefaggotry
>>339198636
>Go full true neutral and be a hermit and interact with no one.
Literally this. Neutralfags should live in a cave and stop interesting with people that care
>>339198685
How is petting the puppy or kicking it any fun?
>>339198801
Cause you pet a virtual doge that is a cool doge
Or kick it in the sun cause you hate doges and its funny
>>339188914
this is the state of /v/
The problem with "Good" or "Bad" alignments is that they inevitably take away from choice.
In the Mass Effect games (and many other games are guilty of this too, I'm just more familiar with ME's system), if you don't always take the Paragon options, or always take the Renegade options, then you miss out on points, perks and characters.
This means you are either doing a Paragon run, or a Renegade run. All your choices are made before you even start playing the game.
It also stops you playing in a realistic way. You might start murdering random people to get more Renegade points, or letting people who pull a gun on you go because defending yourself is a "Renegade" option.
This moves over to the dialogue. Just because someone shows no mercy to enemies, doesn't mean they'll act like a giant dickbag to everyone they know.
>>339197978
this perfectly illustrates a neutral-babby's thought process. they know that trying to rescue people is the clearly good option, but they're unwilling to make any personal sacrifice. then they don't want to feel bad about it, so they rationalize it as neutral by comparing it to an even worse action. even though not wanting to risk your life is a rational thought, it's just one end of a scale. the neutral-baby will do things that make him feel good until it becomes too inconvenient, and then excuse it as neutral instead of failing to do good.
>>339185287
>dealing in absolutes like a sith
cuck
>>339185287
Even Shadow The Hedgehog had a neutral path as well as good/evil.
Are you telling me games like Mass Effect have less choice than a fucking Sonic game?
The problem with neutral path is that it is more often than not a codename for "good path, but with no strings attached".
>>339199227
Shadow the Hedgehog confirmed GOTYYou're making a good point, the answer is probably yes
>>339185287
You should have the choice to just walk away from problems. Neutral should more often than not be defined by inaction rather than action.
>>339198970
What are you then? a good-babby?
>there's a hostage situation
>they'll only release the hostage if you suck their dicks
>you do it
>they kill you AND the hostage afterwards
This is what happens to candyasses like you
>>339198685
Maybe you don't like dogs, but don't wish it any specific harm?
Is it "fun"? I dunno, but if you don't want to make the choice, but are forced to, then that isn't fun either.
Of course, I also get pissed off with 3rd "Everything is fine" choices.
Going back to Mass Effect, 3 specifically.
The game gives a choice at the end of one mission.
Kill the Geth, sentient robots who just want to survive or
Kill the Quarians who are displaced and want to return home.
This could have been a fantastic choice. But there's a 3rd option which is basically "Save both" and that fucks the whole thing up.
>>339198892
>kick it in the sun cause you hate doges and it's funny
>hate doges
>it's funny
>>339199726
"Save both" only works if you do other triggers
>>339186317
Too late for that anon, but you tried
>>339199606
no I'm an adult that accepts that sometimes I make decisions that are self centered and am not always a good person.
>>339199837
Don't you have to be incredibly shit not to get those triggers though?
Either way, it'd still be nice if sometimes the perfect resolution wasn't there for big choices.
![Kreiadarknessatcore[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/QYgtVoq.jpg "Kreiadarknessatcore[1].jpg")
Gray morality is the best.
>>339200014
IIRC you can't get it if you didn't play 2.
>>339200150
She eats you out no matter what you do
>>339185698
>betafag
you know "neutral" in rpg means you work for yourself, you want to reap the rewards for your face only right?
>>339199943
You do realize that makes you chaotic-neutral, right?
>>339200150
gray morality is good when it means that making a moral decision is difficult because there's situations where someone will be fucked over no matter what you do because people have different interests and opinions. gray morality is shit when it's presented as "there's no good or evil man you got to look beyond that *vapes*"
>>339200395
no, it makes you someone who believes in doing good, but accepts that you can still fall short because of personal weakness.
>>339200519
That's the kind I'm referring to. Choices between good and evil in life aren't always between "help these people despite having no reason to do so and limitless resources at your disposal/a significant enough advantage over them (in the SW example, because you're, say, a fucking Jedi) that helping them out is trivial" and "kill them because reasons"
geez, all these arguments in the form of
>if I do [this] then I am [that (forever)]
alignment doesn't make sense based on one decision, especially for neutral where you can switch between good and evil choices in the eyes of others.
>>339200621
that's literally what the following means
>>339197978
>Neutral doesn't mean you don't do good, it means you outweigh the goods and the bads when making your decision.
>It's not just "no risks if no reward" attitude.
>More like "Is it worth it?"
I wish games actually had consequences for your choices.
Maybe next gen.
>>339201190
That would require work.
>>339185287
Stay at the beginning of the game, tell every quest giver to fuck right off, uninstall
best way to play every rpg ever made
>>339190019
>>339190019
Game pls?
>>339185287
How many times have you made this exact thread, picture and everything now OP?
>>339201578
True neutral.jpg
>>339201101
and that's failing to be good. trying to rationalize it as neutral is just not wanting to accept that you failed.
>>339197978
>Someone burning in a house
>list of silly and myopic 'choices'
>"smart" option is "Ah fuck it, don't wanna get involved"
Neuters are cowards at best and scum at worst.
>>339185287
Playing KOTOR II again the lack of choices in between "Please take give all of my credits to the orphanage" and "Nothin personell..." is jarring.
>>339185287
>what is alignment
>>339201578
Neutral doesn't mean being an asshole.
Of course you'll help people who promise a reward.
>>339203351
>failing to be good
then you're not good
>>339203467
>Neuters are cowards at best and scum at worst.
more like tacticians at best and survivalists at worst
>>339200150
Blue-orange morality is better.
>>339203764
>tacticians
Egotist or sociopath.
>survivalists
Coward.
You don't even consider any other way you could help someone in trouble. You are only concerned about your well being. People would call you a shitbag and you deserve it.
Even "neutral" characters like Mad Max eventually have to do good in the story. They can't just be "no thank you I don't want to get involved" cucks forever
>>339204348
You're the same person who's trying to turn every pro-neutral argument in to "never do good" aren't you?
Read this shit and shut the fuck up already >>339189892
>You act naturally, without prejudice or compulsion
>>339203764
yes, you failed to be good. you were bad for a moment. that doesn't cancel out and make you neutral.
Hey I never played Mass Effect but I played KOTOR
Is Renegade evil or chaotic?
I remember in KOTOR being on the Dark Side had more to do with being assertive and inquisitive than it did with being evil
>>339205056
Renegade and Paragon are both "good". Renegade just means you do more badass actions.
>>339204709
Nope, I'm calling you out on your bullshit NEET-like mentalities where you try to vindicate yourselves for behaving badly.
It's expected people should try to help someone in need in some way. You don't want to. You want a way out. You're either a coward or a prick, plain and simple.
Neutral characters are those that just make realistic rather than idealistic decisions. They might do things for their own good but will also be against evil at the same time. It's hard to set that up in a duality based morality structure. Thats why that morality structure sucks.
>>339185287
Personally, I made some 'paragon' and some 'renegade' choices and that ended up kinda shitty. I just hate how you'vegot to go one way or the other to unlock dialog options
>>339205478
Somebody suggested cheating to have max paragon and max renegade
So if you have to be one or the other extreme why not make a single choice at the beginning and then not have all the cutscenes interrupted by meaningless choices?
>>339201190
Not even AAA titles manage that, and they got fuckton of budget
>>339205806
I'd prefer it to not be two extremes, but neutralfags ITT can't even come up with decent non-choices.
>>339206368
What the fuck do you want then?
No extremes but also no neutrality.
Are you sure you actually like choices as a concept at all? Because that is the entire spectrum you just discarded.
>>339185287
>Paragon: Take the criminal in
>Renegade: Blow his fucking brains out
>Neutral: Let him go, follow him back to his base
faggot
>>339205246
Nope, you're not calling out anything. You make up shit for a category you don't understand, so you try to make it a lower category of evil.
You think neutral means running away from shit when it means doing only things that you feel are right (Not giving a shit about law or gods, or morality)
Neutrality is neither the "yin yang" type, or the "I don't give a fuck" type. It's intuititive. You help if you want to, not because it's good or you feel compelled to.
What you're doing is forcing your shitty opinion about neutrality meaning cowardice or lack of commitment to anything and everything.
I even quoted a wall of text for you, but you still go on baiting, so I'll just stop responding and leave you to your shitty delusions of
>It's expected people should try to help someone in need in some way
I bet you'd like to take a bunch of refugees in your small apartment
>>339205318
This is what I hate about people who claim 'neutrality'. They can claim their decisions are usually based on 'reason', 'pragmatism', rejection of dogmatism etc. and therefore immediately gain the intellectual high ground. They are usually elitists who see themselves about the 'feeling masses'. In reality there is no neutrality, there's always sides.
>>339206773
And those sides are always "why can't we all just get along" and "KILL MAIM BURN RAPE PILLAGE"
>>339206934
Imagine they are. Claiming neutrality in that situation is just backing up the status quo, a conservative position - not very neutral right?
>over the top goody two shoes Mary Sue
>baby raping puppy murderer
I'm not saying I want neutral, but you people can't honestly think this is compelling.
>>339206773
Neutral people aren't afraid of stepping over the lines.
They're the "bad cop" in the cheesy action movies.
- Who gives a shit about a child's life if it means saving ten more.
- Who gives a shit about a sinking boat full of niggers, if everyone else might sink from taking them on another boat.
- Who gives a shit if you blow up a city in an attempt to save the entire world, etc
Sure, neutrality is closer to good side, but they can just as easily be assassins with business mentality
>>339206934
>And those sides are always "why can't we all just get along" and "KILL MAIM BURN RAPE PILLAGE"
Why are you surprised about this in a fantasy setting?
Also to neutralfags:
Name a LOTR main character that's neutral
>>339185287
mass effect is pretty good about giving you options T B H
>game makes fun of you for being Neutral
>Neutral ending takes the most effort to get
>>339207429
>Name a LOTR main character that's neutral
Movies are different, movies have plotarmor.
We're talking about RPG:s and real life, where your choices either make life harder or kill you
>>339191073
Try pic related.
It's pretty grey.
Also, prettydepressing...
>>339185921
Just plays some PC RPGs circa 1997-2001.
Fucking underage.
>>339206696
>You make up shit for a category you don't understand
Nope, I'm calling you out based on what you have posted about being neutral. Your shit may sound good in theory but you've shown in action that being "neutral" means being very self-centered and only taking action when it's convenient to you. In your scenario, you reason not to lift a finger to help someone in any way imaginable (or rather, you only presented one option as a means to vindicate yourself) simply because you don't want to go out of your way. As a result, you display either cowardice or lack of empathy, thus you are a coward or a prick/sociopath.
Like I said, NEET mentality. You want out. You want to be above it. That's not how it works. Own up or grow it.
>I bet you'd like to take a bunch of refugees in your small apartment
Funny, you in your immaturity think this is a point in your favor. The sad fact is that while there may be reason in choosing not to do this especially for people so far away, you choose not to lift a finger for someone right in front of you even if helps just a little. You're a shitbag.
>>339207814
Neutralfags remind me of those fags that try so hard to be a fence sitter when it comes Gamergate, even though it literally makes no sense to be.
>>339207814
I said I wouldn't reply, but your stupidity forces my hand
>you choose not to lift a finger
You choose not to read, go back and actually take it in, then realize how fucking retarded you are.
This is like
>>339185287
I wish that wrex man just what i dont know
>Not being a paragade
>Not RPing as a badass with a heart of gold
>Not being Space Vin Diesal
Jeez', I used to respect you /v/
>>339185287
But Renegade IS neutral.
>good option; gain an ally and receive a long term monetary payoff down the road somewhere
>bad option; gain an enemy and receive a short term payoff that's less than the good payoff
I metagame the heck out of games I play and this really bothers me since it basically forces me to play as a good dude every game.
>>339207814
>>339208247 cont.
No, I didn't have a hemorrhage
This is like the third time I've forwarded you back to earlier posts but you keep ignoring them, so next time you post atleast pretend you understood what the big sentences meant.
Its mostly because neutral doesn't actually make any sense in practice
>Hey town, I know I just killed those Orcs for you but now I'm going to blow you up for no other reason than to negative the positive alignment gain I got with negative alignment gain. hahah im such a wild card with no distinct direction of character to speak of!
>>339208419
literally Bioshock 1
>fallout 4 quest
>4 options
>yes
>sarcastic yes
>more information
>maybe another time
>>339208414
Did you play all the games? It ranges from "punch a motherfucker who deserves it" to "MWUAHAHAHA I'M GLOWING RED WITH EVIL"
>"Would you rather drink shit or eat piss?"
>[x] Those are both terrible choices why would I ever want to do either?
>"FUCKING NEUTRALFAG REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE"
>>339208526
>neutral means you're insane
what? why would neutrality mean you kill people you save or to change your mind constantly?
>>339185287
>evil is edgelord tier
>good is needlessly self-sacrificing
Memes.
>>339208769
That's as bad as /v/'s food analogies
>>339185287
>i want to go neutral REEEEEE
a neutral character would just ignore the events of the game.
>>339208916
It literally does.
>>339187510
>Evil = the easiest path
I would argue that taking the easy path would also be a form of pragmatism and shouldn't count as being "evil"
I find having to separate everything into "good" and "evil" is pretty stupid. Why can't there be different choices with different, not necessarily better or worse outcomes? Does everyone want their games to play out like a stereotypical story with an obvious good guy and bad guy? Shit's boring as fuck.
>>339208526
neutral =! lol so edgy xD im craazy xD lol sorandum
>>339208526
>>339208916
>>339209009
I remember killing random people in The Suffering just so I could get the neutral ending, even though I was mostly helping people before then
>>339185287
Play KOTOR2
>>339208916
Not him but how would neutral work? If a town is being attacked you either help or say fuck you, what else is there to do?
>>339208769
And anyone who isn't a retard would drink piss
>>339209176
Help but take advantage of the situation. Save the town, demand lots of compensation.
>>339209176
Then the neutralfag would say
>"I'll le help you if you pay me" option
But you're still doing good at the end of the day
Firefighters get paid to do good but it's just their job
>>339207814
what does being a NEET have to do with not wanting to pick a side if you think both are shit
>>339185287
>Blue = GOOOOD
>Red = BAAAAD
When will this meme ever end?
>>339209336
I thought you retarded neets would learn something from that Giant Douche and Turd Sandwich episode of South Park.
>>339208419
>play Fallout:New Vegas
>choose Legion
>you get no companions, fewer quests, the world is hostile to you now, absolutely no game benefits
"RPG makers" need to learn what is gameplay balance.
![GFN_AlphaProtocol-840x360-Feature[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/hkTaTz8.jpg "GFN_AlphaProtocol-840x360-Feature[1].jpg")
So is there any game that does it the Alpha Protocol way.
No "You are super awesome shiny angle of goodness and hapiness" or "You are edgiest motherfucker since invention of razorblades" but different approaches to problems and making it easier for that approach the longer you keep up with it.
People that agree with your actions supporting you and giving you bonuses or people that disagree with you actively making life harder for you.
>>339209176
Simple:
You either save them with the intention of getting reward/compensation
OR
You save them because you can and you actually need that town for lodging etc
OR
Those attackers piss you off and you want to get rid of them anyway for ruining your afternoon
These are all good things a neutral can do.
Of course, neutrals leaning on the bad side can take bribes from attackers and turn his back or something
>>339186517
>Kill everyone
>Neutral
>>339209715
So you can use any of those things to justify your good or evil actions you dummy
It's called roleplaying, dumbass
>>339187510
I think New Vegas is the only recent video game I can think of where neutral choices are pragmatic and selfish without judging you one way or the other about it.
Unrealistically agreeable or edgy teenager, your choice. Shit game with shit decisions made for subhuman retards.
>>339188914
Not at all.
>side with assholes who want to replace humans with synthcucks
>side with cool guys who want to rid the country of robots and mutants, but are kind of dicks in that they hoard all the tech that can rebuild America
>side with BLM reskins who want to kill whitey because synths dindu nuffin they gud bois
>side with a nigger who's too lazy to do his damn job so has the white man compensate for his incompetence
>>339209819
but the neutral person doesn't necessarily see the good in his actions, he only sees the benefit of helping in the situation or near-future profit.
>>339209860
Yet the best response neutralfags have come up with are
>Whatever, I'll maybe help you
>Whatever, I maybe won't help you
>>339209794
Please explain how defeating 2 armies consists of killing everyone cause last i checked theres more factions then legion and ncr.
>>339210152
SO WHAT THE FUCK DO YOU WANT
>>339196679
This is the fucking problem with good/evil fuckheads. They think because they feel the need to choose one of the two and religiously stick with it because they literally have to be told how they should act that neutral people do the same as well, doing only the most "neutral" thing in every situation.
Guess what, dipshit, neutral people do whatever the fuck they want. They can fuck up the nigger trying to cuck them, cuck you from your wife and go do something nice afterwards because there's no code telling them what they can or cannot do.
>>339210202
Except like three people already said
>Whatever, I'll help you, but it'll cost you
>>339210457
Bilking money from people when they're desperate: Evil.
>>339210515
THIS ADVENTURING AIN'T GONNA PAY ITSELF
neutral babies will claim that in a scenario where you can help an old lady cross the street or not help her, not helping her is actually the neutral choice and not the bad choice because the bad choice would be pushing her into traffic. it's just a way for them to rationalize being selfish by thinking that a cartoon villian would be even worse.
>>339210428
>Guess what, dipshit, neutral people do whatever the fuck they want.
Good/evil moral systems in video games are fucking retarded and allow for liberal devs to shoehorn in their own ideas of good and evil that basically say "HURR IF YOU DON'T FUCK THE UGLY GIRL OR HAVE GAY SEX UR EVIL".
Atlus does moral systems right.
How dense do you have to be to think that limiting someone's options in an RPG to boyscout or sadist is ok?
>>339210704
Whoa great argument man you sure showed me how wrong I was
>>339210428
Thats exactly the problem. They aren't established characters with rhyme and reason behind their action. They are literally just "LEL I FEEL LIKE KILLING THE GOOD GUYS TODA XD" dragon born tier shit heads
>>339210728
It's not okay, but based on this thread, not only do neutralfags not know what they want, actually adding neutral options would be fucking hard.
I can sympathize with Bioware/Bethesda only doing good/evil shit.
>>339210428
>Guess what, dipshit, neutral people do whatever the fuck they want
"I'm pragmatic about my piracy. I do it not because its a good or bad thing to do, but because it's something I believe I should do."
>>339210428
This, fucking hell, I've been trying to explain this like five times in this thread already, but your post summarizes it perfectly
>>339209439
You seemed to have only seen the first 10 minutes of the episode if you think that the episode supports your viewpoint.
>>339210829
>They aren't established characters with rhyme and reason behind their action.
What established characters? Aren't we talking about rpgs where you are the one making the choices?
>They are literally just "LEL I FEEL LIKE KILLING THE GOOD GUYS TODA XD" dragon born tier shit heads
Just because the rulebook doesn't tell them to kill the good guys or save them doesn't mean they have to act like retards, you're looking at extremes, and following extremes is stupid even if you choose the good/evil choices
>>339211049
Nice strawman buddy but I buy the games I play and the music I listen to, so try again.
>>339211096
you just don't get it. there is no neutral morality someone can follow. all it is is rationalization for not doing good. at best neutral is good doing a shitty job of it. at worst it's evil in denial.
>>339211049
I bet you were thinking that this is somekind of insult? But hey, you just said it how it is
>I do it not because its a good or bad thing to do, but because it's something I believe I should do.
That's actually pretty well said.
The only reason it's cringeworthy is because you have that retarded image accompanying it
>>339211159
Okay if you're that stupid, then Full Metal Jacket (you probably haven't seen it seeing as you're low IQ)
>In other words, it's a huge shit sandwich, and we're all gonna have to take a bite.
>>339186851
You mean like real life?
Even good actions can have dire comsequences. Sparing a life may condemn another.
