You completely miss the point. If your character was supposed to protect a child of Bhaal that was going to stop his resurrection then it would make perfect sense but you are the child of Bhaal that needs protected. Would you sacrifice your entire life to save the life of a drug addict that is going to OD in 5 minutes? It would be a waste of your life and no different than suicide. Risking the lives of the entire sword coast would be the most self centered and immoral thing you could do in that situation. Judging people for how they play a video game is even more silly. I guess anyone who plays GTA is a instantly judged by your highness?
Its easy to justify sacrifice when you are sacrificing the other person. Also, nice Ad Hominem Fallacy there.
*edit* I'm re-reading your comment and I get the impression that you are taking this personally. Despite my comments in that other thread, I'm arguing morality from charname's point of view in universe, not the player's. The test in Hell, are there to judge a good vs. evil axis in absolute terms, justifications mean nothing. The act of allowing an innocent to die, when you (charname) could have prevented it, is an evil act. Insisting that someone die for you, without them being allowed choice, is an evil act. Any claims to the contrary is simply gross justification. Again, as charname. I doubt anyone here goes around expecting people to die for them.
There is no other person. This is a game of little pixel blobs on a screen not people we are talking about. I don't know why you are trying to act moral because you followed the developers designed path in a video game. I just said it above. I am talking about roleplaying here. I wouldn't mind if your main character turned into Bhaal himself and needed to be killed off by your team in the final battle. My point is that If your character was supposed to protect an important Bhaalspawn then I would have no problem justifying the self sacrifice of your character to save the lives of the entire party or the sword coast. BUT all you know about the test is that you can risk one persons life or you can risk your life which in turn puts everyone's life at risk. It's obviously a dumb decision to put your life at risk and I am pretty sure everyone in your party would agree.
Needlessly putting your whole party in danger and risking the elven city, Eliseme and the sword coast just so you can say that you sacrificed yourself for your friend is so ridiculous. I don't know how you can justify it. It's reckless and Immoral which is pretty ironic considering your stance on the topic. If my character were Minsc I could easily justify it. It's not about the character being mine it's about the importance of the character itself.
In BG your character is THE ONE and it would make no sense for him to kill himself for Minsc because it would kill the entire party including Minsc if your character died. Just because you have meta knowledge that Bioware spared your life despite your ignorant decision making doesn't make it right. In fact it makes you wrong. Not because of your decision to risk everyone and everything but because you think you are more moral and superior to people who made more logical decisions than yourself. IE, me. Which is why I have taken the time to explain it in a million different ways so that you understand why you are wrong. It's impossible to play an RPG wrong and it's equally impossible to judge someone's true character based on how they play a video game on their free time.
EDIT: I just read your edited post and I don't know what you are getting at. Nobody is expecting anyone to die for them. There is a risky trail that could hurt or kill whoever takes part in it. On one hand you have your character who everyone's soul is attached to and followed into hell. If you die then everyone in the party is stuck in hell forever and Irenicus is free to finish off the elven village. If Minsc dies nobody else is hurt. It's the decision of everyone in your party to protect you because they understand the importance of your character. If you choose to throw yourself in harms way then you deserve the fate that Bioware spared you due to poor writing.
no. i proved you wrong. you probably did not even read everything as what i said prove you wrong. here is it. the companion killed in imediately resurrect. if i take a coin from your right hand to put in you left hand would you think its stealing? because this is it. just as the coin was imediately given back to you, so you lost nothing. the life of the companion was given back to him so he loses nothing.
This is ridiculous. The sacrifice you make for the good path is meaningless. It has no effect on your ultimate triumph or failure. It is a merely notional sacrifice. Twisting yourself into ethical knots to justify grabbing more power is silly. Just admit you want more power and would prefer that someone else suffer and die - temporarily! - than making a notional sacrifice yourself. And deal with the fact that some people (like the artificial DM coded into the game engine) see that as evil.
"You are chaotic evil if you want me to lose power" ... I mean, srsly?
Point being, it's role-playing. Role-play power-hungry or role-play self-sacrificing.
nope. what i wanted is to not have to lose powers needlesly. as the companion would be resurrected imediately. i resurrect her many times during the adventury. and many others. it was neera. she know she will be brought. "she even says. just bring me to a licensed cleric". remember. sacrifinc anything to save someone who will not even stay dead is needless, it has nothing to do with wanting more power. i have no moral obligation to lose power to prevent the terrible fate of NOT DYING. because this is what it is death + resurrection = life.
other people are talking as if the people who die will stay death. they forget that you can just resurrect the dead party member. or perharps its my mistake. i had forgoten that this is comment section of a mod that its seem to make the death of the companion be permanent.
if the death is permanent then i would not sacrifice the companion becuasei was confident in my skills enough to not mind stats loss. but to properly roleplay here one would sacrifice the companion thinking you could just resurrect him later just to be surprised by the fact that they wont resurrect. and regret taking the life of a partner. i guess. or did they changed the trials since last time i played this game and now death is permanent in the base game too?
It depends on what difficulty you are playing on. On the harder levels I think it permanently kills your party member so there is no body to resurrect. I think it chunks your character. There are a couple of exploits you can pursue to keep your party member and not lose anything on your main character but it goes against the intention of the game design so I wouldn't do it unless you have beat the game before and you are just playing around for fun.
In universe, that's exactly what your party members are. People that have fought side by side with you and have risked their lives to help you. I mean, why even have a discussion on the morals of an element of the game in the first place, only to then turn around and say "It doesn't matter, it isn't real." Why even attempt this discussion in the first place? There are like two pages now of discussion on this subject, and now you want to just flip the table?
I don't want to flip the table, I took your quote as a personal judgement on the morality of myself and others who choose to play the game loosely for fun these days. If that was not an intentional troll then my mistake but your post before you edited it seemed pretty suspect to me. My argument is more about why the so called good path is considered moral and I feel it comes down to poor writing. If you look at the whole picture, your characters importance, what is at risk....It's not really about personal morality. It's about being responsible and making the decision that risks the least amount of lives. That to me makes the evil path seem the most logical. I don't want my party member to die. I would rather take the personal loss than lose a party member. The party member is going to weaken your team far more than a small dex and HP loss.
My argument is that even though it's gut wrenching and immoral from a personal standpoint to let someone die to keep yourself from being killed, more is at stake than just your personal will to live. The fact that you don't die and some people just want to keep the dex score is practically irrelevant to me because it's all meta based knowledge and has nothing to do with the roleplay. Outside of that as someone who has played the game to death and back, I just don't roleplay this section of the game not because I am greedy, immoral or don't want my character to have an identity. It's more because I feel my choices are to act irresponsibly or kill my party member which is considered evil. I play games to have fun and I don't find it fun to roleplay an idiot or to be judged evil by the game and kill my own teammates.
Like I said before, it's actually surprising to me that they included the hell trials in the first place. They are really cool and I am glad they were included but It wasn't executed as well as I would have liked. I really think a neutral path or a smarter option should have been available. I use exploits and don't bother roleplaying. If the exploits get removed I still will not roleplay it. I will choose the "good" path because I don't want my party member to die and I know that I will survive the test. I consider the good path to be just as immoral if not worse than the evil path but both end in loss. That is why I am not satisfied with it and would rather just collect the boosts for fun and move on. I don't get hung up on the alignment of my character and feel that his final decision to let the power of a god go ultimately decides his true intentions. Either way I've got no problem with you and I am aware I get hot headed at times but that just the way that I am.
EDIT:
One last thing, to answer your question better. I think I play these games in a detached state. I don't look at my character as me. I look at it as watching a story unfold and I roleplay to make the character and story work in a way that I find the most satisfying. I don't have much of a personal attachment to main character than any of the others. My character is the main character of the story so I tend to focus on his development more especially since his attitude is not predefined like a joinable NPC. In the end I just can't find an option in the hell trials that I find satisfying for the characters and it really has nothing to do with personal attachment or representing myself. I have no problem roleplaying good, neutral or evil characters and I don't feel that they really represent me as a person in any way.
My argument is that even though it's gut wrenching and immoral from a personal standpoint to let someone die to keep yourself from being killed, more is at stake than just your personal will to live.
My argument is that willingly killing yourself to save someone else, and willingly killing someone else to save yourself are inherently morally equivalent to one another.
This is from a utilitarian, Buddhist, and social survival strategy perspective. Cooperative actions towards mutual benefit are good, sacrifice is neutral, spite is bad.
I rather like Atweaks' option that makes the evil path for quests actually viable & rewarding. At least I feel like I'm losing someting by being a goody goody!
Quest Pack's revised hell trials work on EE, at least when installed through the BiG World Setup.
It depends on what difficulty you are playing on. On the harder levels I think it permanently kills your party member so there is no body to resurrect. I think it chunks your character. There are a couple of exploits you can pursue to keep your party member and not lose anything on your main character but it goes against the intention of the game design so I wouldn't do it unless you have beat the game before and you are just playing around for fun.
played on maximum difficult, they wont die for real. maybe in this mod they will, but not on the vanila BGEE. at least not back then when i played this game for the first time. since that day they added more dificult options. i think there is one where resurrection is completely disabled even if you dont get chunked.
I work for a privately owned company that offers custom engineered solutions for business problems big or small. I have been on a project that involves running clean water to a large population. This project could save the lives of thousands of people and I am the one who designed it. All we need is the funding to go through. A few months ago the money lenders put the project on hold to discuss the design and if their money is being well spent. Since I had some time off and I'm currently single with no kids, I decided to call up an old friend from my hometown that I regularly talk to on the weekends and pitched him the idea of going to New York for a week just to mess around and have fun. My friend, I'll call him "Joe" took the week off and we headed out.
While we were there we ate a bunch of huge meals and checked out a few shows but the trip wouldn't be complete without a trip to the Empire State Building. While we were there I noticed some creepy looking dude that always seemed to be right behind us. I was starting for feel paranoid and when I turned around he looked me in the eyes and then looked down at his jacket pocket. I noticed he had something in his jacket but couldn't' tell what it was because it was concealed. He said "give me your wallets" I pulled my wallet out and showed him that I had no money. "just plastic is all I've got" he got an impatient look on his face and said "I don't care just give me your wallets". So me and Joe gave him our wallets. Then he looked around to make sure the coast was clear and he pulled a gun. "One of you is coming with me, the other one has to jump". "One of us has to jump"!? Joe exclaimed. The look on the creepy man's face softened for a second and then he said "I'll give you a couple minutes to decide who comes with me and who has to jump. The choice is up to you guys"
After a minute of stunned silence Joe said to me. "I'll do it, I'll jump". I turned my head slowly and looked him square in the eyes and said.... "Sure, that's a great justification for seeking more power at the expense of others...lots of awful people have done awful things because they thought the only way the effect good was to take all the power for themselves."
Joe stood stunned with a look of confusion on his face. "What are you talking about? What does that have to do with this situation?" "I don't know but it sounded cool hahahahah" I lolled. I then whip kicked the heavy bullet proof class out of the sky scraper like a true believer of the hard core. " I guess what it means is that I am not going to let you sacrifice yourself for me because I am supposed to sacrifice myself for you. I just don't want to be labled evil for allowing you to jump Joe" The lives of those people who depend on me will be just fine Joe, I just know it." Joe got a tear in his eye."If I die nobody will care or miss me, You have a family and you are working to save thousands of peoples lives. "Why would you hurt and kill all of those people?"
I roared with the confidence of intelligence superiosa "YOU ACT LIKE I HAVE TO DIE TO TAKE THE GOOD PATH!" IT'S ONLY ONE FRIKEN DEX POINT JOE! ONE FREAKEN DEX POINT TO BE ORDAINED IN THE GOOD MORALITY CAMP.
Joe was speechless and had a look on his face like I was totally insane and devoid of any morals. You can't seriously think you are going to survive a 1000 story drop the_sextein that makes no sense! "Sorry, but you are wrong" I stated calmly. "Because I just Know I will be fine."
Of course I survived and I would recommend this course of action to anyone who finds themselves in a similar situation in the future. Just ignore all sense of morality and act as irresponsible as possible with the knowledge that everything will be ok. That's how I live my life and since role playing is an extension of who I am, that is how I play BG2. Bioware confirmed my moral compass by allowing my character to stay good aligned so there is no point trying to rationally argue with me because I will defend this thought process until the day I die.
Come now, emoji's are meant to be shared. If you don't make sacrifices then one of us will have to do it for you and you know what that will do to your alignment. Go ahead...listen to the genie, PUSH THE BOTTON.
hEY LOok GuYS IT's doctor EVIL. You sacrificed that emoji just like you sacrificed Minsc. But wait, wasn't that actually a greater form of self sacrifice because minsc and emoji are surly more important to you than a single dex point. Did you take the good evil path or the evil good path? I'm starting to get confused.
Not really, I'm just having a little fun. I've tried to state my case as rationally as possible. If you don't agree that is fine with me. Further argument would be pointless. Like trying to convince a zealot that suicide bombing is not moral. If an idea is introduced to someone without context and then it is given moral value, the individual can be coddled into giving that morality a meaning that is special to them. That way it's only suggested through the environment and the people surrounding said individual but the individual assigns the idea to the morality themselves making them impossible to get through to. The idea can be twisted to make anything seem heroic. It has caused more death and destruction in the real world than anything else that I can think of. I'm not saying there is some evil trick to BG2, only that some young writer stumbled onto a story telling idea that has a lot in common with methods used to brainwash people through belief.
In BG2, nobody knows the outcomes or the sacrifices. You have two choices. One is putting a single life on the line, the other is putting everyone's life on the line. That's not an opinion, it's a fact.
@the_sextein "In BG2, nobody knows the outcomes or the sacrifices. You have two choices. One is putting a single life on the line, the other is putting everyone's life on the line. That's not an opinion, it's a fact."
One problem with this. The Hell trials are stated to be created by charname's unconsiouss with the purpose of shaping how they will control their Bhaal taint. It wouldn't make any sense for a construct of charname's to kill them for completing its purpose.
I don't want this argument to go on forever but to answer your question, fighting a red dragon could kill you, fighting serevok could kill you. Choosing the wrong path could kill you. If you don't beat Irencus it will kill you. You remember in the first game when the ogre mage is controlling the sirene and it's kiss kills you? The same thing could have happened in hell. The genie at the start plants the idea of heroic sacrifice without context. The reason that the trial will kill your team mate and not you is deliberate just like the moral label on the choice that is in alignment with what the gamer wants(reduce the damage/maximize the loot= Saving your team mate and keeping your alignment. Risks vs rewards.
If it actually killed your character for sacrificing themselves and then a custsene of everyone dieing played out you never would have considered it to be the good path. You would have went with whatever the game wanted you to go with. That was my complaint from the start. That both options suck and it has nothing to do with rewards. I don't role play this part of the game. I know the outcome and I choose the one that minimizes the damage because I don't like the roleplaying options. It's not because it's a tough decision or because I disagree with the morality. I just think it's poorly done. I guess I will leave it at that. It pretty much tells you what you should do which goes against the spirit of roleplaying just like using meta knowledge. Since that's the case, I choose to use meta knowledge to reduce damage and increase rewards because I have already been pulled out of the roleplay due to the writing.
I would like to point out that I never voted and to be honest I would rather the game be left alone. If someone wants to make mods for it, I am always cool with that. So on that point I agree with you.
@the_sextein You don't have to do any fighting in the trials. Taking the good path suppresses the taint and murderous urges, rejecting death for life, so it would make little sense for the good path to cause death. Conversly, the evil path embraces the taint, seeking domination over it. This is played out through killing in (I think) every test, you embrace the murder and dominate it. It makes sense that failing to control murder would end in your death.
Sigh, I never said you had to do any fighting. You asked why a trial would kill you and my answer is because it can. Choosing to risk multiple lives instead of just one sounds pretty evil to me, (Either a very poor irrational decision or trying to minimize the damage using meta) and just like the idealistic riddle at the start of the game, it should have killed you. The writers wanted it to be poetic and it muddled up the role play while making no logical sense. I'm not saying you should play the evil path. If I had to choose one of the options without using exploits I would choose the good path too. The game makes it clear that the evil path is not the one you should take. It goes out of it's way to make you feel bad and it even labels you evil afterword. Too bad the decision was hypocritical.
My point is, why would a task of charname's own creation kill him for completing it properly? I don't see how the test of selfishness is "risking a bunch of lives to save one".
Comments
-- Malcolm Forbes
*edit*
I'm re-reading your comment and I get the impression that you are taking this personally. Despite my comments in that other thread, I'm arguing morality from charname's point of view in universe, not the player's. The test in Hell, are there to judge a good vs. evil axis in absolute terms, justifications mean nothing. The act of allowing an innocent to die, when you (charname) could have prevented it, is an evil act. Insisting that someone die for you, without them being allowed choice, is an evil act. Any claims to the contrary is simply gross justification. Again, as charname. I doubt anyone here goes around expecting people to die for them.
Needlessly putting your whole party in danger and risking the elven city, Eliseme and the sword coast just so you can say that you sacrificed yourself for your friend is so ridiculous. I don't know how you can justify it. It's reckless and Immoral which is pretty ironic considering your stance on the topic. If my character were Minsc I could easily justify it. It's not about the character being mine it's about the importance of the character itself.
In BG your character is THE ONE and it would make no sense for him to kill himself for Minsc because it would kill the entire party including Minsc if your character died. Just because you have meta knowledge that Bioware spared your life despite your ignorant decision making doesn't make it right. In fact it makes you wrong. Not because of your decision to risk everyone and everything but because you think you are more moral and superior to people who made more logical decisions than yourself. IE, me. Which is why I have taken the time to explain it in a million different ways so that you understand why you are wrong. It's impossible to play an RPG wrong and it's equally impossible to judge someone's true character based on how they play a video game on their free time.
EDIT:
I just read your edited post and I don't know what you are getting at. Nobody is expecting anyone to die for them. There is a risky trail that could hurt or kill whoever takes part in it. On one hand you have your character who everyone's soul is attached to and followed into hell. If you die then everyone in the party is stuck in hell forever and Irenicus is free to finish off the elven village. If Minsc dies nobody else is hurt. It's the decision of everyone in your party to protect you because they understand the importance of your character. If you choose to throw yourself in harms way then you deserve the fate that Bioware spared you due to poor writing.
you probably did not even read everything as what i said prove you wrong.
here is it. the companion killed in imediately resurrect.
if i take a coin from your right hand to put in you left hand would you think its stealing?
because this is it. just as the coin was imediately given back to you, so you lost nothing. the life of the companion was given back to him so he loses nothing.
option 1 good route. lose stats
option 2 evil route. loses nothing.
how is sacrifing the life of a companion a thing if they will be resurrected imediately?
death + resurrection = life. companions lose nothing at all
see.
nope. what i wanted is to not have to lose powers needlesly. as the companion would be resurrected imediately. i resurrect her many times during the adventury. and many others. it was neera. she know she will be brought. "she even says. just bring me to a licensed cleric". remember.
sacrifinc anything to save someone who will not even stay dead is needless, it has nothing to do with wanting more power. i have no moral obligation to lose power to prevent the terrible fate of NOT DYING. because this is what it is death + resurrection = life.
other people are talking as if the people who die will stay death. they forget that you can just resurrect the dead party member. or perharps its my mistake. i had forgoten that this is comment section of a mod that its seem to make the death of the companion be permanent.
if the death is permanent then i would not sacrifice the companion becuasei was confident in my skills enough to not mind stats loss. but to properly roleplay here one would sacrifice the companion thinking you could just resurrect him later just to be surprised by the fact that they wont resurrect. and regret taking the life of a partner. i guess. or did they changed the trials since last time i played this game and now death is permanent in the base game too?
In universe, that's exactly what your party members are. People that have fought side by side with you and have risked their lives to help you. I mean, why even have a discussion on the morals of an element of the game in the first place, only to then turn around and say "It doesn't matter, it isn't real." Why even attempt this discussion in the first place? There are like two pages now of discussion on this subject, and now you want to just flip the table?
My argument is that even though it's gut wrenching and immoral from a personal standpoint to let someone die to keep yourself from being killed, more is at stake than just your personal will to live. The fact that you don't die and some people just want to keep the dex score is practically irrelevant to me because it's all meta based knowledge and has nothing to do with the roleplay. Outside of that as someone who has played the game to death and back, I just don't roleplay this section of the game not because I am greedy, immoral or don't want my character to have an identity. It's more because I feel my choices are to act irresponsibly or kill my party member which is considered evil. I play games to have fun and I don't find it fun to roleplay an idiot or to be judged evil by the game and kill my own teammates.
Like I said before, it's actually surprising to me that they included the hell trials in the first place. They are really cool and I am glad they were included but It wasn't executed as well as I would have liked. I really think a neutral path or a smarter option should have been available. I use exploits and don't bother roleplaying. If the exploits get removed I still will not roleplay it. I will choose the "good" path because I don't want my party member to die and I know that I will survive the test. I consider the good path to be just as immoral if not worse than the evil path but both end in loss. That is why I am not satisfied with it and would rather just collect the boosts for fun and move on. I don't get hung up on the alignment of my character and feel that his final decision to let the power of a god go ultimately decides his true intentions. Either way I've got no problem with you and I am aware I get hot headed at times but that just the way that I am.
EDIT:
One last thing, to answer your question better. I think I play these games in a detached state. I don't look at my character as me. I look at it as watching a story unfold and I roleplay to make the character and story work in a way that I find the most satisfying. I don't have much of a personal attachment to main character than any of the others. My character is the main character of the story so I tend to focus on his development more especially since his attitude is not predefined like a joinable NPC. In the end I just can't find an option in the hell trials that I find satisfying for the characters and it really has nothing to do with personal attachment or representing myself. I have no problem roleplaying good, neutral or evil characters and I don't feel that they really represent me as a person in any way.
This is from a utilitarian, Buddhist, and social survival strategy perspective. Cooperative actions towards mutual benefit are good, sacrifice is neutral, spite is bad.
Quest Pack's revised hell trials work on EE, at least when installed through the BiG World Setup.
While we were there we ate a bunch of huge meals and checked out a few shows but the trip wouldn't be complete without a trip to the Empire State Building. While we were there I noticed some creepy looking dude that always seemed to be right behind us. I was starting for feel paranoid and when I turned around he looked me in the eyes and then looked down at his jacket pocket. I noticed he had something in his jacket but couldn't' tell what it was because it was concealed. He said "give me your wallets" I pulled my wallet out and showed him that I had no money. "just plastic is all I've got" he got an impatient look on his face and said "I don't care just give me your wallets". So me and Joe gave him our wallets. Then he looked around to make sure the coast was clear and he pulled a gun. "One of you is coming with me, the other one has to jump". "One of us has to jump"!? Joe exclaimed. The look on the creepy man's face softened for a second and then he said "I'll give you a couple minutes to decide who comes with me and who has to jump. The choice is up to you guys"
After a minute of stunned silence Joe said to me. "I'll do it, I'll jump". I turned my head slowly and looked him square in the eyes and said.... "Sure, that's a great justification for seeking more power at the expense of others...lots of awful people have done awful things because they thought the only way the effect good was to take all the power for themselves."
Joe stood stunned with a look of confusion on his face. "What are you talking about? What does that have to do with this situation?" "I don't know but it sounded cool hahahahah" I lolled. I then whip kicked the heavy bullet proof class out of the sky scraper like a true believer of the hard core. " I guess what it means is that I am not going to let you sacrifice yourself for me because I am supposed to sacrifice myself for you. I just don't want to be labled evil for allowing you to jump Joe" The lives of those people who depend on me will be just fine Joe, I just know it." Joe got a tear in his eye."If I die nobody will care or miss me, You have a family and you are working to save thousands of peoples lives. "Why would you hurt and kill all of those people?"
I roared with the confidence of intelligence superiosa "YOU ACT LIKE I HAVE TO DIE TO TAKE THE GOOD PATH!" IT'S ONLY ONE FRIKEN DEX POINT JOE! ONE FREAKEN DEX POINT TO BE ORDAINED IN THE GOOD MORALITY CAMP.
Joe was speechless and had a look on his face like I was totally insane and devoid of any morals. You can't seriously think you are going to survive a 1000 story drop the_sextein that makes no sense! "Sorry, but you are wrong" I stated calmly. "Because I just Know I will be fine."
Of course I survived and I would recommend this course of action to anyone who finds themselves in a similar situation in the future. Just ignore all sense of morality and act as irresponsible as possible with the knowledge that everything will be ok. That's how I live my life and since role playing is an extension of who I am, that is how I play BG2. Bioware confirmed my moral compass by allowing my character to stay good aligned so there is no point trying to rationally argue with me because I will defend this thought process until the day I die.
In BG2, nobody knows the outcomes or the sacrifices. You have two choices. One is putting a single life on the line, the other is putting everyone's life on the line. That's not an opinion, it's a fact.
One problem with this. The Hell trials are stated to be created by charname's unconsiouss with the purpose of shaping how they will control their Bhaal taint. It wouldn't make any sense for a construct of charname's to kill them for completing its purpose.
If it actually killed your character for sacrificing themselves and then a custsene of everyone dieing played out you never would have considered it to be the good path. You would have went with whatever the game wanted you to go with. That was my complaint from the start. That both options suck and it has nothing to do with rewards. I don't role play this part of the game. I know the outcome and I choose the one that minimizes the damage because I don't like the roleplaying options. It's not because it's a tough decision or because I disagree with the morality. I just think it's poorly done. I guess I will leave it at that. It pretty much tells you what you should do which goes against the spirit of roleplaying just like using meta knowledge. Since that's the case, I choose to use meta knowledge to reduce damage and increase rewards because I have already been pulled out of the roleplay due to the writing.
I would like to point out that I never voted and to be honest I would rather the game be left alone. If someone wants to make mods for it, I am always cool with that. So on that point I agree with you.
"The sun will turn into darkness, and the moon into blood, before the great and terrible day of the Lord comes."