Do you save the ultimate evil boss?

[MadeinHell]

Search checked, sorry if I missed it somewhere.

So... Topic of this topic (ugh...) is what you do in say an RPG game if you are playing a good character and you finally encounter the final bad guy? Because most of the games give you an option to "let him go" no matter what he did, and quite honestly for me it's just dumb.

Why do I want to let this guy go? Did he do a Shreck cat eyes or something? I mean... Say that the main reason of getting to him was... I don't know... he butchered my wife and son!
So I go through the entire game and have an option to kill him but I CAN'T because I've been the "Good guy" entire time and for some silly reason now I feel like letting him go. It's not important that ONLY on the way to his office in the final level I senselessly killed like every security guard ON THE PLANET but noooo, that guy realised he did a bad thing I need to let him go... WHY?!
If I wanted to let him go I wouldn't go after him at the very beginning! And why can I save him If I can't save the soldiers on the way? People who are just doing their jobs, have wife and kids and probably don't even really like the villain.

What's your take on this ridiculous plot mechanic? I completely hate it, UNLESS the guy in the end has a deadly and painful illness of some sort that will be killing him very very VEEERRYYY slowly. Than I might let him go.

 

[Jandau]

Unless there is a damn good reason to let him go, I'll pop a cap in his head. Though I have to admit, no game springs to mind that lets you do this, at least without making a tricky moral choice...

 

[SnootyEnglishman]

It's annoying and they want to see if everyone has true good in them no matter what. But everyone knows gamers have a hidden evil within them.

 

[w1n5t0n]

If they were going to continue it in a later game, like Mass Effect, and the Evil Final Boss also had the Big Gun, but only he could use it. Something like that where there is an advantage to you for keeping him alive thats not "but i need to do GOOD", but if theres not, even if i played a good character i kill the bad guy, hes the bad guy for crying out loud...

 

[Legion]

Well I managed to convince Saren in Mass Effect to commit suicide it seems, so I'd say that's one step more evil than shooting him yourself. I mean, what kind of sadist does that? (This is a joke, I get why it happened).

 

[Srdjan]

No usually find most creative way to kill him.

 

[Kelbear]

Search checked, sorry if I missed it somewhere.

So... Topic of this topic (ugh...) is what you do in say an RPG game if you are playing a good character and you finally encounter the final bad guy? Because most of the games give you an option to "let him go" no matter what he did, and quite honestly for me it's just dumb.

Why do I want to let this guy go? Did he do a Shreck cat eyes or something? I mean... Say that the main reason of getting to him was... I don't know... he butchered my wife and son!
So I go through the entire game and have an option to kill him but I CAN'T because I've been the "Good guy" entire time and for some silly reason now I feel like letting him go. It's not important that ONLY on the way to his office in the final level I senselessly killed like every security guard ON THE PLANET but noooo, that guy realised he did a bad thing I need to let him go... WHY?!
If I wanted to let him go I wouldn't go after him at the very beginning! And why can I save him If I can't save the soldiers on the way? People who are just doing their jobs, have wife and kids and probably don't even really like the villain.

What's your take on this ridiculous plot mechanic? I completely hate it, UNLESS the guy in the end has a deadly and painful illness of some sort that will be killing him very very VEEERRYYY slowly. Than I might let him go.

The point is that the quest for revenge has turned you into a killer, as shown by the hordes of men you'd slaughtered to get to this point.

Now, the most delicious and inviting kill you've ever wanted lies in front of you, ready for the taking.

The choice of whether to kill him pivots around Kantian Deontology. The good is in the intentions. If it's in your nature to kill, Kant reasons that you show greater morality to act against your inclination and resist killing. If it's in your nature not to kill, then you don't prove anything by not killing, it's not a moral choice, but simply following your natural course of action.

So in the face of the greatest temptation, you have a philisophical opportunity to reject your nature and declare your true identity.

So I kill that fucker dead.

 

[MadeinHell]

Search checked, sorry if I missed it somewhere.

So... Topic of this topic (ugh...) is what you do in say an RPG game if you are playing a good character and you finally encounter the final bad guy? Because most of the games give you an option to "let him go" no matter what he did, and quite honestly for me it's just dumb.

Why do I want to let this guy go? Did he do a Shreck cat eyes or something? I mean... Say that the main reason of getting to him was... I don't know... he butchered my wife and son!
So I go through the entire game and have an option to kill him but I CAN'T because I've been the "Good guy" entire time and for some silly reason now I feel like letting him go. It's not important that ONLY on the way to his office in the final level I senselessly killed like every security guard ON THE PLANET but noooo, that guy realised he did a bad thing I need to let him go... WHY?!
If I wanted to let him go I wouldn't go after him at the very beginning! And why can I save him If I can't save the soldiers on the way? People who are just doing their jobs, have wife and kids and probably don't even really like the villain.

What's your take on this ridiculous plot mechanic? I completely hate it, UNLESS the guy in the end has a deadly and painful illness of some sort that will be killing him very very VEEERRYYY slowly. Than I might let him go.

The point is that the quest for revenge has turned you into a killer, as shown by the hordes of men you'd slaughtered to get to this point.

Now, the most delicious and inviting kill you've ever wanted lies in front of you, ready for the taking.

The choice of whether to kill him pivots around Kantian Deontology. The good is in the intentions. If it's in your nature to kill, Kant reasons that you show greater morality to act against your inclination and resist killing. If it's in your nature not to kill, then you don't prove anything by not killing, it's not a moral choice, but simply following your natural course of action.

So in the face of the greatest temptation, you have a philisophical opportunity to reject your nature and declare your true identity.

So I kill that fucker dead.

I bow in front of your great philosophical knowledge.
From now on I will be killing the fuckers dead.

 

[Oktanas]

what game did you played that allowed you to save the boss???

 

[iLikeHippos]

Well, maybe if I were playing God of War and I just slit the bastards throat.

Than I might let him go to, just to let him grasp his final breaths, than die in peace.

 

[Mechsoap]

kill...him

 

[Vet2501]

I would kill him. I usually play as a "good guy" in RPGs, but it's usually a chaotic good. I wouldn't have any qualms about killing someone that deserved it.

 

[Marter]

It depends on if I've grown any attachment to him/her, and what his/her previous actions were.

 

[Kragg]

in dragon age, who else accidentally had alistair leave cause you were "being too good" and had logain kept alive?

im usually being good, cept when being good gives me worse loot or less xp, then i usually kill everything

 

[Methos12]

in dragon age, who else accidentally had alistair leave cause you were "being too good" and had logain kept alive?

That would be me.

 

[Spy_Guy]

Actually, the lack of a "let him go" option bothered me in Heavy Rain, because despite the things the Origami Killer did...

Spoiler

...I couldn't just kill Shelby! He was my favorite character

 

[Darth Caelum]

Only when it benefits me. The game calls me a killer, a cold blooded evil being for hunting him down. I say so be it. The only reason i would let said evil boss live is if he would benefit me you know, like Loghain.

 

[Yureina]

It depends on the character that i'm playing. I've only really run into this with Colonel Autumn in Fallout 3. Sometimes I let him go. Sometimes I just shoot him. At least once i've shot him, pulled out a sword and cut him up, then threw him into the water.

It really just depends on what type of character i'm playing. Some are more vicious than others. ;P

 

[MadeinHell]

in dragon age, who else accidentally had alistair leave cause you were "being too good" and had logain kept alive?

That would be me.

And me... Stupid Alistair... Made me load up a save and go through the entire scene AGAIN :/

 

[IxionIndustries]

Yeah.. They should let you save the guys working for the baddie, not the guy himself. Because he is the one who put the others up for it. Maybe he fucking has their family as hostages, or they are brainwashed or mind-controlled.. They didn't do shit. The asshole at the top did it all. He made the plans, corrupted, bought, or enslaved the minions, and simply wants to fuck you up.

So no, I wouldn't save the head honcho.. Unless, of course, there's a really fucking good reason why he killed my parents, locked me away, took my princess to another castle, made those fucking puzzles, raped my dog, etc...