Why are neutralfags so annoying?

Pretty much this and stuff like Fallout 3 makes the goody-two-shoes/moustache-twirling villain dichotomy all the more prevalent

True neutral would be turning the game off.

...

But chaotic neutral is usually the most insufferable.

>Playing "Good" character
>Game gives me absolutely retarded decision that will almost certainly fuck everyone over like being nice to one person at the risk of everyone else's lives
>Being a smart, good person punishes me by labeling me as neutral and not giving me a good ending or rewards
>Being blinded by feelings so I make a shitty decision keeps me as a good guy even though I risked everyone else's well being
>Picking the retarded option usually works out perfectly due to some retarded reason that makes no sense

i didn't even know possible to stay neutral in Infamous

Law: Kill everyone who's not with us.
Chaos: Kill everyone who's not with us.
Neutral: Kill everyone.

Grid 2
>I'm in first gear and going forward
>I'm in reverse gear and going backward
>I'm in neutral and BRRRRRRRRRR

chaotic neutral is like Garrett

He's honestly more true neutral. When I think chaotic neutral, I think barbarians and obnoxious free spirits.

Garrett is a free spirit that wants nothing to do with the keepers though and goes around stealing shit.

You're only interested in using your powers for revenge but will refrain from creating collateral damages?

Would make sense.

neutral's hat is fucking great though I've always wanted one of those retarded looking things

Depends on the game, but it's usually "M-muh humanity"

Chaotic anything is usually just an excuse to be a disruptive piece of shit. Chaotic Good is only constrained by the requirement to not do bad, and even then you gotta put up with the player's insane rationalizations of morally questionable behavior.

>I torture the lovable scamp for information on the local mafia he works for

I'm glad you finally changed your shitposting. It's still shit, though

kek

>SMT
>GENUS VULT, HEAVEN AND HELL BOTH MUST BE DISMANTLED

fucking neutral path always best path

Sounds like true neutral to me.

If he were chaotic neutral he'd be a nutjob as well.

>always think I'm playing neutral
>good karma out the ass just because I'm not a total fucking psychopath
why do so many games do this shit
mass effects renegade system was actually pretty alright about this

Biowate touts mass effect as a role playing game, but I can't even play out my role, a huge fucking racist
>be nice to humans
>be a huge jerk to aliens
>don't have enough paragon to be even nicer to humans, and dont have enough renegade to be even biggier jerk to aliens

He's not chaotic though.
NL is muh law
TN is muh people close to me and muh self
CN is muh self fuck everybody else I act completely on my whims

...

hahahaha, good one OP

inFamous doesn't even have any way to play neutral. Sure, you could alternate between good and evil choices, but saving that kitten doesn unmurder the schoolbus full of orphans.

This, and what is the point of morality if your choice is set at the start of the game
"I'm going to be a good guy"
>Make every single 'good' choice.
>I save the bad guy!

"I'm going to be a bad guy"
>Pick every red choice!
>I kill the orphan because...!
It's the kind of shit a twelve year old thinks is cool and/or smart. There's nothing complex or fun about it.

People always seem to forget the other agnostic way to frame the god issue: it's a fake, meaningless problem not worth wasting all that time over.

what did they mean by this?

Because games are poorly written and refuse to actually take a side on any issue so the neutral route is usually the only one that makes any damn sense

I wish inFAMOUS actually let you be neutral. I love the games, but everything feels like "Would you like to be a sensible person or a fucking psychopath?"

If they made a new inFAMOUS game that actually had more than 2 choices and gray areas, that's be pretty cool

>Does god exist?
>No, never met or saw him and the idea seems implausible
>him

this is probably the worst bait I've seen since I started coming to this site 6 long weeks ago

I'm more annoyed how in every game being good is always more rewarding than being evil.

>you saved me
give me you're gold
>jerk
*you received 20 gold*

vs

>you saved me
think nothing of it
>i shall repay you someday
*encounter the character at a later point*
>thank you for saving me, take this gold
*you received 100 gold*

every single fucking time

The desire for neutrality stems from the fact that video game morality is usually so poorly written that good/evil can be generally simplified to "naive faggot" and "irredeemable asshole", to the point where remaining neutral at least means you don't have to sit through any of that shit.

Well-written morality should present two paths that would each appeal to different players and combine to provide at least one reasonable option to most players. Almost no games actually have this, though, in favor of the choice between "take the word of God up your ass thrice daily" or "burn the orphanage and rape the survivors."

>implying you can't have serious convictions and beliefs with regard to preserving the status quo and be opposed to certain inflammatory stances left and right parties have that are designed to be divisive by their very nature

I don't like playing neutral but it's nice to know the option exists.

Ye. I'm kind of with that.
Now that I think about it, I do sort of wish Infamous had a neutral option lol

post best neutral characters

God agnostic fags are the true neckbeards of our time

This. We just want to not have to choose between LITERALLY JESUS OF NAZARETH and LITERALLY HEROD. It's piss poor writing, no matter how you spin it. It makes the game insufferable.

>Bioshock
>Save little sister for less adam or kill her for more, hmm, nevermind, they give me a shitload of adam as a bonus for not killing them, what's the point

...

Mostly because neutral characters don't make any sort of sense and are usually a result of a poor writer who can't grasp the concept of a developed character with their own set of ethics and ideals

Jesus have neutrals destroyed your life or something? How many times have you made this thread you massive autist? Do you seriously can't think of anything better to discuss?

The problem with Mass Effect, especially 2, is if you don't go all good or all bad you get fucked over.
>always pick the goody two shoes option
>punch the reporter because edgy memes
>it's the only edgelord option I picked
>don't have enough goody two shoes points to make Jack loyal come her loyalty mission

Everybody that isn't a 10 year old would know balacne is the only way to go.

>I don't give two shits about what the other two guys are fighting about but one of them is going to die to maintain cosmos

>i want a moral gray area in a fucking comic book story

this is how retarded you are

>Fable
>there is no need for anyone to suffer because the lack of monopoly laws means I can just gain absolute control of the whole economy and skim off the top to fund the army AND the repairs. The worst that happens is some people have to relocate to cheaper housing.
>Mass Effect
>through keeping one hand firm and one hand gentle I can identify which situation calls for which, like any good manipulator of people learns, resulting in having a much easier time getting people to do what I want without throwing a tantrum about it
>InFamous
>I defy your shitty karma system and use my powers as I see fit on a case by case basic as I go through this revenge narrative.
>Fallout
I have no reason to believe any of these faction leaders can do a better job than I can, and most of them are glaringly incompetent. I will do and say what I need to get as many loyal allies as I can and wipe out the rest, most of which won't be missed.
>Shin Megami Tensei
>Human destiny should be decided by humans for humans, not by gods using us as pawns in an elaborate debate

God is a man, you fucking heretic!

I don't understand what neutral will even do in most games. I mean infamous Second Son pretty much has no neutral way to play, if you play neutral, you lose the chance to get most upgrade because they require a level of good or evil. Besides, there really isn't any neutral, your good or bad. You killing someone will make you evil obviously, but just cause you decided to kill someone SOMETIMES and sometimes not, doesn't change the fact that you killed someone.

>Mfw people take sides and then bitch about who's right or wrong

Read the bible

I hate that there's barely any games with tough choices
In Mass Effect, for example, you're basically just picking what color of points you want, and you'd better stick to one and one only because you'll get gimped in your conversation skills if you try to mix or pick middle options.
Or in Fallout 3 where all of the bad karma options just make you a crazy psycho and all of the good karma options make you super Jesus, and trying to mix the two just makes your character seem schizophrenic

The person who made this probably can't stomach things like "Last Thursdayism" or "We live in the Matrix".

My favorite line from neutralfags is when they say both sides are so extreme that they're the same

Jesus Christ, a double strawman?

Whoa shit, breaking the mold there with two irrational strawmen in that MSPaint cartoon

>requiring a character to stick to an alignment, including neutrality
>not just dealing with every scenario on a case-by-case basis according to however you'd prefer to solve the problem in that particular moment

Wee free men! Nae king! Nae quin! Nae laird! Nae master! We willna' be fooled again!

>I think I should decide how society is organized!
yeah, you both sound like fascies to me

no, that's the white ending

This is how I play most games, which is why I loathed the system in Mass Effect where you needed to have enough 'good guy points' to be a 'good guy' and vice versa. Utterly retarded idea.

how many levels of strawmen are we on right now

...

Will admit, I hate chaotic neutral.
There are a number of ways you COULD play chaotic neutral, but really most people that choose it do so because it excuses them for anything they do.
"lol i burned the orphanage down and kick puppies but it's not an evil act cause I'm so random and cuhrayzee"
If you do this in D&D, fuck you.

spot the superior thinking, reasonable centrists

About 2,5 Dobsons

>centrist means not taking sides
"America was a mistake" C.Columbus

...

God doesn't have a gender but in the english language (and other languages) the masculine pronoun is used also for neutral gender. The pronoun They could be used as well but it has a plural connotation (albeit it doesn't have to be that way, people will infer it as such).

FUCK YEAH HUMANITY
Or
I WANT TO RUN AWAY FROM MY PROBLEMS, ATSUROOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO

Having a serious conviction or belief =/= lapping up the kool-aid and defecting completely to one side of the spectrum

wow you're even more superior than centrists?

how superior are you, user?

If a double strawman looks like this, what does a double red herring look like?

if you do this in DnD your GM is meant to throw alignment shifts your way, culminating in a hard shift to evil and all the trigger-happy paladins that brings

You can't be natural in Infamous shit poster

obvious fake conclusion juxtaposed with seemingly rational conclusion that actually begs the question

>human destiny to be decided by beings who have no full understandings of their nature

Neutral path doesn't make muc sense, it always tilts one way or the other anyway. . Albeit neutral in SMT is far better than neutral in other games.

It depends on the game. I usually like to be a big dick to the bad guys but good to the good guys.

No true Scotsman into ad hominem
If you have a full super you can grab and chain into a sick slippery slope

Get a life, alt-right bootlicker

>people seriously don't believe there is a higher power in some way, shape, or form

Believing the universe is a random event is like believing if a tornado went through a junk yard enough times it could make a fully functioning 747. Like, do you people actually sit back and think how complex and co-dependant just shit on our planet is? And newsflash, the scientific "community" is just as shadey and agenda pushing as some organized religions.

>pointing out that Americans have a warped perception of politics due to their bipolar system means that you have feelings of superiority

we have only the gods' word for it that they understand our nature better than we do, and no reason to believe them

...

Kinda hard to be true neutral, it's almost like being apathetic, but not because you don't care. Even taking your own side makes you not really neutral anymore, so you end up shifting towards chaotic/lawful and good/evil.

I'll let you frame the issue then, what purpose does the concept of god (as in omnipotent, omniscient, omnibenevolent, ineffable) fulfills from a philosophical standpoint, that is not better addressed by leaving it aside, regardless of faith?

we're talking about video games, karl

>Good
>I want to donate all my money to every single person I see and help grannies across the street and solve world hunger and aids at the same time

>evil
I want to steal the money og every single person I see and push grannies into the street and cause world hunger and aids at the same time

>Neutral
>actually acting like a person

Ah yes yuropoors, the pinnacle of political sanity. Yes, yes.

>not trying to roleplay as a complex character who has a sense of morality balanced with rational self-interest and who sometimes encounters morally ambiguous situations, like in real life

>going anything but Neutral in an SMT game

Only Linkin Park fans and fuckwits pick chaos and law, respectively.

I AM SILLY

You find neutral people annoying because anyone who cares enough about an issue with two sides has been taught to hate the other side throughout a lifetime of media consumption.
That's east enough, you can automatically point to an opponent and say "They disagree and are therefore bad." With that you can brush off anything they say without second thought, something else media consumption has trained you to do.
When you encounter someone who is not against your side but not for it, it forces you to actually think about the topic and you have trouble deciding whether or not you should consider what they're saying or ignore it. Also you have to look at who they are before you can instantly say you hate or like them.

Really it isn't neutral people or stances that you hate, it's having to think about things. Funnily enough, people often tend to hate that more than the things they say they hate, because "hating" opposing sides has become so passive.

>You can't even pin down my political beliefs

So THIS is why people hate "centrists" so much, because they can rip apart all of your hackneyed stances but you can't generalize and dismiss them because you don't know exactly which positions they favor, so you're at a loss. Loving EVERY laugh.

But Good-Chaos is the best ending in DeSu.

>I win.
I chuckled

this except i don't care about winning

Ever noticed that one can never mention god in a thread without someone pulling the "fedora neckbeard" card on them?

That's because it's actually their only argument, and they're hanging on to it to this day.

needs someone in the distance yelling "There is no ethical consumption under capitalism"

Checkmate, atheists

Not only that but centrists often have very conflicting beliefs because they love flip flopping all over the political spectrum like a bipolar teenage girl changing clothes every 3 hours.

No, autistic people like you who sperg out at anyone who chooses CN because they've had shitty experiences with people who didn't play CN properly are insufferable.

Can I ask how you guys manage to care so much about politics?

>That's because it's actually their only argument

Not him but that's not the reason. Why even bother engaging somebody so embarrassingly dogmatic? Anything you say will just be met with cynicism and memes so it's not worth the effort, easier to post fedoras.

Except it's neutral people who hate to think. They refuse to take a stance on a matter and therefore contribute nothing to the discussion.

oh shit, son, an ms paint comic! i'm not agnostic anymore.

because it's what makes the world go round user

that and money, which is directly tied to politics

...

>isn't greed more evil than anything?
No. Where the fuck did you get that retarded idea?

>what does the word "usually" mean?

Cool it, hothead. I'm sure your CN character bio is avant garde and truly something to behold.

>Renegade choices in Mass Effect always included being a dickhead to your teammates

Only times I couldn't pick the Renegade option. I'll punch a reporter in the face for no real reason, but I'd never be rude to Garrus.

>not thinking about the merits of both sides and incorporating the best of each into your ideology

The two on the bottom are the same.

Because I work in political economics

>agnostic
you mean atheist

I like shitting on people for their politics because it's fun, I don't really care about elections, voting, and actual policy though

Then you've taken a third side and is no longer neutral

>thinking he considered identifying and rejecting all spooks to be the end goal of his thinking and not building a more knowledgeable relationship with the ideas society lends itself to and thrusts upon the individual

But you will never have any say in politics, you are just one man. All you will ever be able to do is simply accept what is happening. What are you so fucking invested?

Acceptable. Enjoy your career of lying and thievery.

Because the best way to fuck over extremists(law or chaos) is by the sword.

*Agnostic Atheist

>Law
MUH GOD
>Chaos
MUH FREEDUMS
>Neutral
MUH WAIFU

>not even 3 sentences in and he mentions God

Dropped.

fair enough

it's neutral if the third side is between the more extremist sides on the relevant political spectrums

>Enjoy your career of lying and thievery.

Ouch user. Y'know I'm a human being too, "greed" and "sociopath" memes aside.

There literally isn't a neutral option in infamous

nice oxymoron

every man has the choice of assassinating one other man in his life. you gotta pick the right one, the one that's worth going to jail in exchange for putting them six feet under

so you're saying it's better to be blissfully ignorant?

I guess so but I like knowing what goes on in the world, and what might happen to me in the future, what to do to make the best of situations, etc.

Also one man can often make a world of difference, every major political player was at one point "just a man"

Neutral alignment is objectively the best alignment. You can't prove me wrong

...

There isn't in Mass Effect either, and neutralfags love complaining about both.

That's exactly what you're supposed to think about people who won't take a strong stance on either side of something. There's always so much pressure to go for one side or the other the easiest thing is to just go with the 'lesser of two evils' instead of considering if it's worth it just to say you have a side that you're on.
Then most of the shitfits in this thread are moot because the neutral is a term used against anyone taking the middle ground.

>Dropped
You're gonna wanna skip the 19th century's body of non-political philosophy in general.

No it's not. Neutral is when you don't agree or disagree with something. If you're on the middle, you agree with some things and disagree with other.

A neutral stance wouldn't be anywhere on a spectrum.

>pick only niceguy options
>become super jesus
>everyone loves you
>they give you free shit

>pick only edgelord options
>become super hitler
>everyone hates you
>they bully you or attack you on sight

>you are just one man

Ignoring the endless stories of one man rallying thousands of people in his opinion, then yeah sure, you're right.

fekkin solipsistic

philosophy is meme anyways

>A neutral stance wouldn't be anywhere on a spectrum
>A neutral fluid wouldn't be anywhere on the acid/alkali spectrum

Can someone crop this gondola for me? I'm gonna stick and poke it on my fucking ribcage.

>chemistry analogy

...

Yeah. stories. Change doesn't happen until the super elite decide it happens and they dont decide it happens until they can profit from it

I seriously hope you're voting for Trump, Cred Forums.

...

The beauty of being neutral though is the freedom and mobility of your actions. There's only a handful of ways to be good, or evil. Neutral is by far the most adaptive, and pragmatic ideology. It's all about the flavor of how you achieve it. A good neutral character still has strong ideals and morals but they're not classically defined as being totally one way or another

That one was up there with food analogies for video games. Also VIDEOGAMES

Then Neutral people really can't be annoying by that virtue, they must disagree with some points either side makes and have their own opinions, otherwise it would be someone coming into a discussion, saying "I have nothing to say here and do not take a stance in this issue and have no opinions on it" and then leaving without debating anyone on anything because they would have to take a stance somewhere.

debate me

Those words don't oppose each other at least as far as the meaning a listener is meant to receive.

Agnosticism, the position that the existence or non-existence of a god cannot be determined and Atheism, the idea that with that in mind, you default to non-existence in consideration of the question.

>I don't believe in god, but I'm certain conclusive evidence one way or the other won't be found.

This is what true enlightenment looks like

I'm breaking the legs of whoever wins because it's unamerican to make me live under the rule of someone I don't like. that's the whole reason we left britain the the first place.

...

This

I am.

I hate trump for being an ignorant racist whose only runing to make a mockery of the democratic system. But if he's elected the senate will absolutely not worth with him on anything and we will get 4 years of dead locked nothing so no major fuck ups will happen

Hopefully they will be able to revoke Obamacare in that time

not an actual buddha quote, literally originated from facebook

>because it's unamerican to make me live under the rule of someone I don't like.

Name a single political system where at least 95% of the people will approve of the leader.

I expected this thread to attract all the sociopaths that wail about "moralfags" ruining everything.

This outcome is much better.

SOMEONE CROP THE FUCKING GONDOLA I NEED IT

Diogenes should be below plato

innawoods

nigga they'll just press v and it'll be back to business as usual

do you not have fucking paint?

>that's the whole reason we left britain the the first place.
No, that was for the freedom to be asshole protestants nobody wanted to deal with.

...

>morals
>real

>I will kill everyone
>I won't kill anyone
I'M NOOTROLL

...

>wanting us to waste more money on iraq

What about ethics?

You know what im not even mad. Explain to how anything I just said means more war in iraq

Here you go friendo ;)

ethics aren't real either

>

...What am I looking at here?

WELL IT'S FUCKING HARD TO CROP A PICTURE IN PAINT WHEN YOU'RE ONLY USING YOUR DICK

renewing america's efforts in the middle east is the one thing trump and the senate agree on

...

Is that you Freggposter? Where's your little brother?

What is real, then?

...

>try to be the evil psychopath and choose all the dick choices
>bro-tier character is a good guy and would risk his life for you
>can't be evil anymore because don't want new best friend to be disappointed
I've never been able to be evil in any game, shit sucks

Gave me a hearty chuckle

My conciousness

anime

memes

Thanks for the laugh user!!!

the Pure Land is real, but none of us live there.
yet

My waifu.
You're waifu isn't real, though

>SMT: 4 neutral
>SMT: Strange Journey Neutral

Best routes, most of the time.

my opinions

nothing is real. Like nothing as in the absence of everything, for it is real.

The Harpers were weird in Baldur's Gate 2 because of this. Jaheira apparently hates being too good, even though she cares about natural order above all else.

>stumble into SMTIV's Neutral route in my first playthrough
>have to attempt to navigate Japanese sidequest guides through Google Translate because it was still only the release week in the US
Never again.

He disenfranchised me after the debate. What's worse is his supporters flooded the polls so now he thinks he won and all hope of it humbling him and him learning from it is out the window.

How about i want to be good but try to solve conflicts in a NOT FALLOUT4 STYLE, like shaking people by the shoulders and ask them what the fuck is wrong with them ?

I really have no other place to post this but I just need to say that the evil route in Infamous SS is the absolute stupidest story I have ever seen in a videogame that I've played to completion.

You kill *everything*

I was kinda tempted to do an evil replaythrough to see what it's like corrupting all those impressionable young metahumans but I had a feeling it would completely ruin any sense regarding his interactions with his brother

I play with an autistic guy who ONLY plays as chaotic neutral dragonborn characters, whether its a fighter, wizard, sorc or bard, he is ALWAYS a chaotic neutral dragonborn and acts edgy as fuck and doesn't role play, he just fucks with things cause LEL CHAOTIC NEUTRAL. I hate his characters

it does all that and more
both druggie and nerdlinger turn from "people wanting to do the right thing by the wrong means" into total assholes after a short conversation with delsin over the fucking phone
His brother should detest his every action he does but since they didn't bother to actually change the cutscenes so he still says how much he loves his brother when he falls off that cliff and still helps him out in missions despite delsin being a complete asshole 100% of the time to him and murdering his own police force. Augustine plot becomes somehow even stupider than it already was with delsin doing the same thing he did in the good ending except he murders the cunt instead and everyone fucking hates him and proves their point for him while being too stupid to realize it
and the ending oh my fucking god, betty's interactions with delsin were bad enough at the start of the game but the ending is so unbelievable it ends up a comedy ending

yeesh, I'm glad I didn't end up subjecting myself to that and I'm sorry that you did

...

When your choices are either paragon of all that is good or pointlessly cruel dickface there is nothing wrong with wanting to be closer to the neutral zone

Neutrals are gay fencesitters who can't make a decision and follow through. Chaotic good is the master-race alignment. Fizban ftw.

it was almost worth it for the ending, me and my brother were both big fans of 2 and we were fucking howling at the ending for a good 3 minutes
its not like the good playthrough was too much better either, SS in general had a shitty story

perfect

There are instances in which I really couldn't care less. Like if someone asked me if I support trump or hilliard is say neither. Neutral on the matter.

where is
>Okay but why? - Socrates

And such is the life of a cattle...

Typical Jill Stein voter

Where did you pull "acting out of your own self interest" from? Also real is not black and white and I literally cannot comprehend why you think videogames shouldn't reflect that

Did you physically cringe while you were typing that? Because I did while reading it.

Keep your shitty opinions on facebook

...

there we go. saved

...

>people act like the good/evil/neutral system is worth while

Go play something like Armored Core 4 Answer or Bard's Tale for better examples of morality and choice systems.

youtube.com/watch?v=uqVsmPCDnSc

youtube.com/watch?v=HOOiB-NV3Ps

A binary system isn't inherently bad, their just really cookie cutter and boring by now.

...

Is there any game where being a good guy isn't the best option?
>Characters stay alive
>Everyone likes you
>Good rewards
>Most of the time it unlocks the good ending
SMT are the only games I can think of where following the "good" path isn't necesarilly better than the bad.

>my nigga bach
it's not complete shit, just mostly

>memecore the post

>God is real because I can FEEL him

>that fucking pic
>that music section with no Handel or Wagner's Ring
>"art" being separate from movies/literature/music and not called "paintings"
The anime section is the joke right? Most of those are considered shit as far as I see here and Avatar isn't even an anime.
At lest Quijote is there that's good.

It's an image meant to trigger boards.

It mixes arguably good options that a deal of Cred Forums likes with more normally accepted "classics" and a few random dark horses to both confuse and infuriate.

Don't read to deep into it.

every single section is a joke, using a combination of things that are actually good, things that are crap, and things that don't belong there at all to bait morons into replying.

is this even the original, i feel like this shit changes everytime i see it

Some of the choices are fucking genius. Super Mario RPG is a mix, a decent game, not as great as the best of the genre, guaranteed to get nintendo shitposting both ways, and it might even lead to SM4SH shitposting with Geno.

...

why do people NEED to pick a side and stick to it no matter what?

That's what I thought at first but you check the anime section and it's all shit or not an anime at all.

I wouldn't consider law good.

Also that pic is shit I sincerely hope it's bait since two of the anime pics aren't even from a Japanese show, and the video games section is pure opinions Planescape is a decent book though.

I'm assuming it's bait, but the other sections look like they at least tried.

This is one of the best bait images ever made

fucking retarded kys faggot

come over and kill me yourself you entitled normie

Someday I dream of people using agnostic correctly.

Ideological inflexibility is a good thing for some people. Hammering down the entire thoughts and opinions of a person based on the general understanding of their ideology is super convenient compared to the nuance inherent to accepting that people walk around with incomplete/conditional beliefs based on their subjective experience and bias.

>words
>having 'correct' definitions
mouth sounds mean whatever two or more people agree they mean for the duration of their dialogue

it appeals to the neurological urge to reduce things down to extremely basic decisions so that you can make those decisions faster. Monkey that decides all tigers bad forever lives longer than monkey that considers possibility of friendship with the 'good' tigers.
some people just don't want to do without the simplicity of such friend/foe identification that we no longer need

Except he saves the world 3 times despite supposedly "only caring for himself" and in the end he kinda embraces his nature as a keeper (of course we are only counting the first 3 thief games as there is no such thing as a 4th installment and there will never will)

>be drooling retard good guy that puts everything at risk for no reason
>get rewarded
>be drooling retard evil guy whos literally just "LEL IZ EBIL"
>get rewarded slightly less
>play like a smart person wavering on the line picking options that are best for each situation
>game punishes you

this is the ultimate redpill

You are like a little baby, watch this

BOTH EXTREMES AND CENTRISTS ARE ALL THE SAME

>Believing the universe is a random event is like believing if a tornado went through a junk yard enough times it could make a fully functioning 747

It can, but the possibilities of that happen are so low that they might as well be 0%

>Tell myself every game I play I'll try and choice the choice I agree with the most, be it bad or good.
>I still always end up white knighting/ agreeing with the good guys.
>Feel satisfied at the end, but hollow that I essentially am missing out on content, regardless of how trivial.

>I hate trump for being an ignorant racist
..huh?

>implying the existence of the abrahamic large g god actually matters when the scriptures and practices of the associated religions have more influence over the world

I am counting like 10 layers of irony here lads this is too much for me

if we throw a SUCC in there we might jump right to 13

We need a buffer for Kamen Rider so we can end it with smug anime girl.

How about a vector of Kaiji also with "Justice" as a green text, but with a sarcastic face.

>ancap

...

Kaiji was about gambling dummy, you're thinking of the retarded Akagi tripfag.

Akagi was also about mahjong and was sort of a bitch.

Why is there a SUCC at the top?

Having SUCC at both ends makes it post-ironic pre-irony
dude how many levels are you even on?

like 5 or 6 my dude how about you?
(this is supposed to be videogames)

if I have to explain it to you you're not deep enough

but why would I have to explain it to you when you're post is ironic itself like this one

I'm on so many levels of irony I actually enjoy playing video games

you cant, since theres only a good and evil ending and the karma bar doesnt have a neutral section

>Implying you are not double reverse-ironing with this post

>Implying I wasn't doing that ironically

You are like a little baby.
Watch this.

in STALKER I was convinced both sides would end up fucking up, so I killed everyone

I think you're getting somewhere

just need to throw in a few things like SUCCiological SUCCrates, >not killing SUCCs etc and we'll have a real spicy memerino on our hands.

This

...

I think we've hit maximum irony here lads
Unless someone wants to prove me wrong

Hold on, fixed it to add artifacting

needs a little SBaHJ

>pick the option you would pick in real life
>the option which you think is best and most good
>game informs you that you are evil
SHIT!

Fuck you Obsidian.

>I have no feelings about this post, one way or the other.

You may or may not be free in your opinion, depending on your location.

Split path evolution?

this 5

Sounds like an asshole. Autism isn't an excuse to be unreasonable. I've been diagnosed for ten years.
And even i know that dungeon's and dragons isn't entirely about the self and the ego.

I recommend trying something new with your group. come up with some bullshit reason like it's to refresh them.

make a archetype characters decide their gear,backstory, and personality. than have dice determine which player's get which character.

if everyone thinks it might be cool but your autist member. play anyways.

if he makes an ass of himself because he doesn't get to play his self insert faggotry. than tell him he's free to leave if he's not having fun. and that he is more than welcome to come back when you play with his dragonborn partys again.

and than never play with anything but the premade characters

may seem like a dick move. but i can't think of anything worse than autists who make the same character to jerk off with everytime they play dungeons and dragons. plus people playing a character they didn't make brings out the best roleplay i have ever seen.

As one of the contributors I approve

THE TIMELINES ARE CONVERGING

>ICA is
[Spoiler]NOOTRAL[/spoiler]

Meme theft is a serious crime mate.
You'd better credit the original creator next time.

It's reaching critical mass, we're all fucked now.

I always thought Geralt was more on the good side
Sure he's a Witcher but he doesn't like choosing any evil and he also seems to have more emotion than the other ones
"evil is evil the levels arbitrary and the definition blurred if i had to choose between two evils I'd rather not choose at all"

posting in epic thread

A lot of games with karmasystems just have predetermined moments were the player is allowed to make moral judgement where the choice is often binary.
The choice between good and bad.
(>save baby >eat baby)
Or atleast what the creators deemed good or bad.

Realworld problems do not have a clear division between good and bad, everybody has different ideals/ideologies/values.
So if you make good choices according to your own views, the game might tell you otherwise.
(or vice-versa)

Most neutralfags i've talked with call themselves neutralfags from the perspective of the creator. This didn't mean they tried to pursue neutralness or whatever, they just did whatever they wanted.

TL;DR
Having a predetermined good/bad moralistic karmasystem is silly. The only thing player-choice should influence is a causal effect on the world that in term can be interpreted by the player.

Geralt =/= Garrett

I hate this thread but I gotta reply everytime I see it, fuck you OP. The issue is that nothing in the game challenges your thinking. You are given the EVIL option of skull fucking an innocent bystander or the good option of cutting off your own arm to feed an orphan. There is no moral dilemmas present and everything is black and white. The people who want neutral options actually just want games to not be so fucking black and white with the options. Because currently the dialogue plays it fucking self. Might as well just ask me from the start if I'm doing an evil playthrough or a good one that way they could just select my responses for me. Now please stop posting this fucking thread so I can stop explaining this shit to you retards.

This war of mine did player choices good imo

Same with Witcher LIS and any tell tale Game

Fuck I need some sleep
My bad haha

Just because writers are too retarded to accurately implement neutral doesn't mean it's not viable. Most real life people are some form of neutral.

>I need to feel validated by sharing a predetermined point of view while applying misguided generalizations to specific topics with no argumentative value and smother myself in a mountain of bias to feel safe.

>go to The Pitt in FO3
>have to choose between handing a baby over to a bunch of slaves, or supporting the guy who enslaved them, both of which want a cure
>conclude that the slaves had a much higher chance of accidentally killing the baby before they manage to synthesize a cure from it, and the slaver claims it should only take a few years for him to do it. After which he intends to free all the slaves. My chara can always come back later to see if he kept his promise reevaluate the situation, and decide then if I should just kill him and free the slaves myself or not

>any serious evaluation I gave to the moral dilemma is immediately shattered by the lump of evil karma I got afterwards

just...just don't tell me what my karma is if you're going to be that obtuse about it.

>get superpowers
>don't want to hurt people
>don't want to put in the effort to help people
What's wrong with that?

How moral choice is supposed to work:
- pick good or bad option
- bad option gives you some temporary benefit
- in the end you are punished and fail if you take the bad option

How it actually works in games:
- pick bad or good to get different colors!
- remember that morals are relative!

>get superpowers
>it's not time freeze, mind control, or true invisibility

why even bother

because nearly any superpower is OP when properly refined

>tfw neither theist, atheist or agnostic
Feels good not having an agenda.

...

Shape shifting is the best power, especially when there's no mass limit.

Not everyone wants to be a rapist.

>There are only two positions on any issue
>If you don't agree with one of the two extremes you're an asshole fence sitter.

Because cryokinesis is styling to the max.

please stop these dumbass strawman posts

projecting. you're a scumbag

inb4 a shitty strawman about posts like this

>Socialists
>against hierarchies
lol no
Also when people talk about horseshoe theory they are not saying they are the exact same in beliefs but in method and that they share numerous comparisons.

You can "i am silly" this all you want, but i fully agree that my consciousness will never have a 100% accurate answer to anything.
I question the fabric of reality or whatever it is i think i'm experiencing everyday.

But then again i'm the kind of person that went through psychosis, panic-attacks, existential-meltdowns and probably depression.

Moral of the story:
If you guys or this universe are even real in the first place, you should probably never mix lsd with weed like ever.
I don't care whatever hip article you've read on vice or r/trees, or canada. smoking weed can severely fuck your world up.

I wish i was four again.

What will people call me if I literally don't care about politics at all?
My interest in politics goes as deep as wanting Trump to win purely for the shitstorm.

How can you not be? Even having no opinion would make you either atheist or agnostic.

So are these like living tumors or something?

Nope.
I literally don't care. There's obviously no christian god, but there could be something out there somewhere. Humans will go extinct before we ever meet that theoretical being, so why even bother thinking about it?

Some religions are abhorrent, but not because they believe in a god. I literally don't care even one tiny bit about gods or belief.

Wow, neutralfags are bad, but now I know antineutralfags are just as bad.

Good thing I'm aaagnostic.

>you should probably never mix lsd with weed like ever.
haha, oh I made that mistake. was trapped for what felt like years trying to figure out why things were the things they were rather than any other things, in a dark and cramped tent, stuffing my face with trail mix until I vomited

Sounds deist to me desu

You're an atheist brah. Welcome to the fedora club

But I don't feel the need to debate everyone I see about religion, so how can I be atheist?
I don't have any affiliation.

I don't even know my own political affiliation.
I'm ethically conservative, socially liberal and economically both.

Atheism isn't a movement, it's just a description. Like fat, or tall, or stupid.

Did you ever get over it? Or "normalize" to a certain extent?
If the answer is no, feel free to just not reply and give me the illusion that you might've just gone to bed.

Well you'd better start.

Well I don't fit into the atheist description.

If you don't believe a god exists, you're atheist.
If you do believe a god exists, you're theist.
If you do believe something created the universe but it's not god, you're deist.
So most people like you default to atheist- not believing a god exists.

But I have no affiliation with the atheists. I'm not an atheist, I'm just a regular old human being who has better things to think about.

But atheism isn't an organization you can be affiliated with. Atheism+ was an attempt at that, and it sucked. The word "atheist" literally just means "person who doesn't believe a god exists". That's it. You don't have to read Dawkins or some shit.

>flip flopping

i'm not running for the fucking president, i don't need to align my opinions 100% with any party

user, you're not understanding me.
I'm not an atheist. I have more important things in my life than to worry about if god exists.

Why are you inflicting your bipolar disorder on us?

>think liberals have some good ideas
>think conservatives have some good ideas
>I'm forced to choose one or the other, including their bad ideas, rather than support the specific ideas that I agree with

This is why I donkey vote.

Sounds to me like you're an atheist.
>I have more important things in my life
And yet here you are discussing it on a Croatian curling forum

>It's a "someone makes a subtitled gif but the gif isn't long enough for the person to actually finish the phrase" episode

This Ugandan homosexual stoning forum, even at its worst, is way more investing to me than religious debate.
I don't affiliate with anyone. I'm not even a fanboy for a particular video game company. I literally don't care.

>Did you ever get over it? Or "normalize" to a certain extent?
Yeah, I studied up on assorted metaphysics, philosophy, subatomic theories, and wackjob 'while we can't prove the universe isn't like this' models until the issue just sort of 'settled' in my head. basically I came to terms with the possibility that none of this could be real, since even if none of this is real there's still nothing I can do about it and there's no meaningful difference between it being real and it not being real so I might as well just roll with it.

I recommend reading the novel Permutation City, as well as marathoning the Lesswrong wiki (with a grain of salt. a lot of the time his thought experiments are more insightful than the conclusions he reaches with them)
I'd also recommend the novel House of Leaves, and Carl Jung's Red Book. plus the usual philosophy 101 stuff, Heidegger, Kamus, Satre, Plato, Aristippus the Younger and the Cyrenaics etc

>Make random choices covering both good and bad

LOCK ME UP

But you must either -believe a god exists, or -not believe a god exists. It's a dichotomy. That makes you either a theist or an atheist.

Or -maybe a god exists but we'll never meet him so why should I give a rat's ass

That still sounds deist to me. Agnostic deist.

Thanks a ton man.

I screencapped your post for future reference.
(Fuck Heidegger's writingstyle though)

Nah. I don't affiliate with any movement. Life's too short to waste time being angry at people you'll never meet.

being neutral is as close to being a Bard as you can

underrated post

Again with this weird belief that atheist/deist, hell even theists are somehow an organization. They're literally adjectives. That's all.

Mod it so you Can use the paragon-system locked choices

Well I don't affiliate with any of those adjectives.
I'm what's called a "human". I'm a person with my own problems who doesn't feel the need to fit himself into the neat little religious pigeonholes.
I'm just me, I literally don't care about any of that shit.

correct option

You don't affiliate with any adjectives. You are are them. I don't "affiliate" with tallness, I just AM tall. Same thing with atheist/theist.

You can not care about having brown hair, but that still means you have brown hair.
Maybe it's your writingstyle that consistently implies something else, but i'm not sure that sinked in.

Nah, I don't associate myself with those movements, and I've never introduced myself as "agnostic atheist".

I've never introduced myself as tall, but I'm still tall.

Not every smt game is SJ, you fucking retard

Israel

Neutral is clearly the best option in strange journey.
>Let's join the Angels and indoctrinate the unbelievers!
>No, let's rule the demons and fight the creator!
>Fuck both of you, I just wanna go home.

>Good Path = Ending A
>Bad Path = Ending B
>Neutral Path = True Ending

I don't think that's a similar situation.
When you say "I'm an atheist" people instantly know you're a faggot. I'm not an atheist, so I don't tell people I am.

I may be atheistic, but I'm not an atheist.

L I T E R A L L Y

N
O

G
A
M
E
D O E S T H I S

Laffin

Being "atheistic" is, by definition, being an atheist. Is English your second language or something?

SMT4 does exactly that.

found the fagnostic

KoToR 2 comes close. a lot of the most insightful dialogue options don't show up until you've gotten both the light side and dark side endings

I think English may be your second language if you don't understand that words change and gain new meaning over time.
I'm not an atheist. I don't believe in a god, but I don't consider myself an atheist.

It's like how you can be attracted to men, but not consider yourself an AIDS riddled faggot. Words don't have one, singular meaning.

if you're attracted to men you're an androphile, no two ways about it

...

But if someone's attracted to men, that makes them gay, no matter how much they might protest not being affiliated with gay culture. They're still gay. And you're still an atheist. I don't believe the definition of atheist has changed given my experiences of the word.

it's not a 'true end', it your character no-clipping through reality into the dev room

game over bucko

>If you don't reply to this SUCC your mother will SUCC in her sleep tonight
>SUCCdon Pooper

it would be more ironic if it also had immunity cat up the top

>tfw I'm the chaotic neutral in my dnd group
>my character is basically two face, making decisions based on coin flips
>tfw It's the most fun character I've ever played

>our party joins a local thieves guild
>quest is to steal the princes prized hunting bow so the leaders can ransom it back to him
>I have to distract the guards
>my character can only kill if he lands a heads
>it's tails
>panic
>grab the guards sword out of his sheath and sprint down the street
>it fucking works and the guards give chase
>our sneaky rogue character doesn't have to do anything more than walk through the front door

Tell me again that chaotic neutrals aren't fun as fuck.

MOMMY NO

But I've never read Richard Dawkins in my life, so how can i be an atheist?

>this whole thread

This is art.

ITT: youre either with us or against us fags

When youre strong enough, such squabbles are pointless. Call neutral faggots annoying but in the end theyre some of the toughest fuckers out there.

DADDY! I WANNA GET OUT OF THE MEMETUB NOW!

it needs a bit of tweaking so keen anoons can't recognize the sheldoon from the thumbnail

neutraltards
>were not so different you and i

you got a source for that image? is there more to the story? you know, the before and after.

Saved

Holy shit

>NOO
Why can Amiercans not pronounce anything correctly? Nue is pronounced 'nyu'. (Of course so is 'new' but you can't get that right either, you subhuman monkeys.)

>nyu
it's nju, actually

>XDDD

...

It really depends on the context, you can't be neutral in all situation though, we all end up choosing a side soon or later.
"A friend to all is a friend to none"

Fuck

Reminder that, while playing DnD specifically, if you're playing neutral and are not a bounty hunter or mercenary you're most likely not playing your character correctly.

An ignorant
No offense, I don't give a fuck about politics too and just vote the ones who can make the biggest shitstorm

Just don't brag of it, it's wrong to don't have one but I literally don't care anymore

>not going lawful neutral
>not going neutral good

If a game's story is purely presented as black and white, it has a pretty shallow story. It's not to be neutral, that's retarded. It's because everybody has a different belief on what is good and what is bad. Why should I have to do what a liberal says is good? Why would they want to say what I say is good? Instead of a karma system make the reputation system be determined by individual groups, because how societies see you will have a much bigger impact on your life than a karma meter that can be balanced out by just giving spare change to a poor guy to wipe away all the heinous crimes you did.

Or at the very least, make evil have a much bigger benefit over doing the good option. Because if doing good was always the beneficial answer, no one would do evil.

>Playing InFamous
>Doing two seperate runs, one for good, one for evil.
>always take the good choice if doing a good run and vice versa since it gives you the powers you need and gives you the entire storyline of that side
>Without fail there is a choice that is fucking retarded for the side I'm on and refuse to choose it so I go with the other one, ruining the run.

This has happened to me on my first run of all 3 games.

I'm Australian, people like me are becoming more and more common here. We've had a fucking terrible government for almost a decade now, and most people have just stopped caring. Everyone knows the country will get worse regardless of which government is in. Our one chance at some major improvement in the country, the NBN, was ruined completely and permanently, so people have given up.

u ok buddy?

not to mention it's blatantly obvious Liberals are rigging the election with how they repeatedly happen to get exactly the number of postal votes they need to go from losing the election to winning

I like this thread, this is the best possible way it could've derailed and there's still a surprisingly low amount of shit-flinging

I'm surprised no one has posted about Shrek. He's probably the best example of a neutral character in modern media, both in regards to how well known he is and in demonstrating the idea that "self-motivation does not mean evil." He even fucking brings it up himself in the movie. The only reason he gets involved is to get fuckers out of his swamp.

Also I know OP is a baiting faggot but the main reason why neutralfags complain about those games is because they, and many other games with a "morality system" fail to account for and/or benefit characters who would not blindly choose the good or evil options 100% of the time. In other words, the situation writing sucks dick.

The reason nobody has brought him up is that we are swimming in layers of irony with

>be good, no kill run
>no one ever does permanent damage to you when taking care of your kindness (if that ever happens)
>enemies you knock out (with no chance of accidentally killing them) never wake up unless found, no one ever notices they are gone, and they never show up in later levels
>every problem that demands a harsh, realistic attitude can be solved better with a kind, pacifist one.
>sparing major villains always results in more content later on or in follow up games. villains you spare never kill people while you are away, thus removing content to balance it
>being mixed, neutral tends to be punished as not getting the full rewards of being good

for the record, SMT has a good path (neutral) and two evil (or at least blatantly less good) paths in Law and Chaos.

Good point. Now put him in one of those.

I had to afk for a while is why I asked (and those seem to fail at least 75% of the time for me) but thanks senpai.

np, it's a good one

shreks just a retarded role reversal of the save the princess plot.

>playing pacifistically causes enemies to eventually not see you as a threat and let you walk through entire levels unchallenged until the real bad guys show up
HD remake when

Good job, you summarized the basic plotline. Now look at the characters.

>implying high level telekinesis isn't the best thing possible.
ALL MATTER IS BUT MY PLAY THING.

I don't think you know what "role reversal" means. Unless you're referring to the idea that Farquaad is an asshole version of what is the usual protagonist king & Shrek is an asshole sent on a quest instead of a noble knight. They aren't role reversals though: that would be sending a princess to save a knight.

i thought the girl was secretly an evil ogre.

greed isn't evil, because anything against my personal interest is evil, therefore my personal interests are pure and everything against such is considered evil, by me

Never thought I'd see continued debate about Shrek in such a thread.

bazinga

>anything against my personal interest is evil
hollup that's not right

you aren't me, are you? how can you tell what's evil, for me?

there is nothing wrong with thinking from your own perspective, it's only natural

She wasn't evil: she was still a princess waiting to be saved. She just happened to go ogre by night, which is only atypical, not a role reversal. The story wanted to flip a traditional-style "hero rescues a girl" story on its head, but it does it through means other than "Whoa, the princess is gonna rescue a knight! Isn't that just CRAZY?!" because that's some low hanging fruit. Instead they mess with character archetypes, like setting the protagonist as a fucking ogre tasked to do the busywork of some rich asshole because the ogre wants some fucking privacy.

Your reasoning isn't faulty, it's your interpretation of how typical allignments work.

They're more often than not relative to society's standards, laws, virtues etc.

A man who goes around killing for no reason isn't not evil just because he's deluded into thinking what he's doing is right.

And what archetype is Donkey?

Memes aside Shrek is a fantastic film.

Only the good ones, like SMT1

chaotic evil

Sounds pretty fun, might borrow that idea for a gambling addicted rogue character or something

Lovable/annoying joker and the fool to shrek's upright man.

typical alignments, sure, they are typical alignments, and most society recognizes them as the standard
but what i'm saying is this:

if you take yourself, for example, subconsciously, you will always make decisions that benefit you (disregarding damage to the cerebellum and other such brain injuries)
greed isn't evil, due to it being natural

to help another could bring yourself benefit, in possibility
so, anything inflicting on your personal benefit could be considered evil, by the individual, whether or not you consciously agree with it or not

even if an individual has no intention to harm, or put you at a disadvantage, you may consider their actions evil, due to the repercussions it has on you remotely

i recognize morality and alignments, but i think they're a way for the self to rationalize (in a fake way) actions/reactions, to put a label on others as evil

why consider yourself evil, if it's beneficial to you? how is it committing an act of something bad, when you gain from it? if it is advantageous, even a slight bit, you will do it
if it is disadvantageous, there's no way you could rationalize doing it, other than to gain some sort of mental pleasure from doing the 'wrong' thing to your own interests, which in turn could grant you that aforementioned pleasure

do you get what i'm saying?

...

>party of 4
>CG, CG, CN, NE (me)
>CN turns into CE
Fuck me

what is this called again? I swear my friend tried to get me to play it once and I forgot. And I need something to play that isn't wow since I cant stop getting mad at balance.

iji

Since we are all motivated by chemical changes in its basest form, all emotion and agenda is ultimately meaningless. In the face of such nihilism, arbitrary concepts of morality and society lend meaning to existence as far as interpersonal interaction is concerned.
To act upon your own biologically-motivated desires is to ignore civilization, and depending on the results of such actions, potentially evil by the definition set by societal consensus.

Meanwhile, in an actually good RPG, Fallout: New Vegas, neutral would be something like a mercenary, working for House or NCR but not buying into their ideologies, always doing what the customer wants regardless of moral implications.

Yeah I get what you're saying.
It is an interesting train of thought I'm just saying it can't be used to justify actions, since we live in a world that abides by the moral standard of good and evil that society is built on.

Due to the western world having been largely influenced by Christianity, things like virtues and sins become important in defining what is a good action and what is an evil action.

then it'd be beneficial for me to act in a way that would make me seem non-evil to others, and only consider the impedance an evil act, without acting far-fetched from reality

i get it, i'm just trying to work my head around different ideas, not trying to be a devil's avocado or any such thing like that. i just find it interesting to think and discuss about it

why is this thread so good Cred Forums is so shit in like 90% of threads

...

Donkey is more of the "plucky adventurer do-goody" type, but nailed his role in the story. He's the loyal funny guy that sticks with the protag because the protag just happened to save his ass that one time.

i find threads that talk about general concepts have more value than threads that narrow down to franchises and such, as it allows for more discussion rather than blind hate towards others based on what they like or dislike

OP that image example is fucking shit. That Hyperbole is fucking atrocious.

What about a Neutral ruler who tries to be fair and impartial but understands that difficult, even brutal decisions must be made?

If I had to shoot 5 kids in the head with a gun to save my whole country from being nuked I'd do it.

heard you were talkin about morality like i wouldnt find out

>character goes from feeling sorry for killing aliens to feeling angry if you continue to kill

That game was real good honestly, I should replay it.

>Johnny please don't kill me please let me go I swear I'll leave all this behind and you can just leave
>Johnny is the bigger man and frees Valentine
>HAHAHAH FUCK YOUU JOHNNY FUCK YOUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUU

What did Valentine mean by this?

because full hero or full chaos doesn't suit me, neutral does