Poll: To kill or not to kill...

[MeChaNiZ3D]

In stealth games, I like to keep hidden and undetected, and won't compromise on that. I will take the time to haul bodies into vents and enclosed areas even if there's virtually no risk of them being discovered in the open. But I do also kill every guard if I'm not going for an achievement or mission objective or something. Half the time it's functionally the same as the non-lethal option, and the other half of the time it's better because they're not going to wake up later. Although I would consider non-lethal more if you could lock the guards in cupboards tied and gagged instead of just leaving them somewhere to inevitably wake up and have all their faculties, something that has always annoyed me about games where the guards wake from tranquilisers.

 

[freaper]

I always tend to do a pacifist run the first time through. Pacifist as in I'll only strangle them enough for me to not get bothered by guards. I find that most stealth games punish you a lot more for trying to do it non-lethal, as opposed to just killing everyone.

 

[ShrimpMania]

I always go with non-lethal if I'm given a choice. It doesn't really depend on the situation.

If I'm given the option to spare them, and stop them form doing what they do, then I will. I don't want to end "real" lives or digital ones and I feel bad when I have to(or I pretend it didn't happen). If I'm going to escape to a more fun or better world, then I want to be able to say that killing people is not more fun or better! So more or less difficult, stealth or not, directly or indirectly, I choose not to kill. You can't just be Texas and give everyone the death penalty.

My cousin usually takes the the "knock them out and then kill them" route. It might be funny but its still horrible and I will convert him to the ways of "not evil".

 

[DirgeNovak]

I used to quickload every time I fucked something up in a stealth mission, but now I don't anymore. I'll try the non-lethal route most of the time, but if I have to kill someone to avoid an alarm being sounded or something, I own up to it. A lot of games come much more alive and fun when you play them organically instead of mashing the quickload button every three minutes because a guard heard you fart.

 

[Smiley Face]

It really ends up depending on the game - some game mechanics just don't offer enough support for non-lethal combat for it to be a viable strategy, but when it is, I go for it when possible.

 

[Mrkillhappy]

For the most part I do no kill the only times I don't is if it is something like a boss battle then depending on the character I will choose how to proceed. Although through most of the stealth games I play I try to avoid any form of contact including knocking them out because I like the challenge it presents.

Also note the irony in this information given my username.

 

[Windcaler]

The mark of a good stealth game is getting past sentries and guards without them ever knowing you were there. A game like splinter cell which forces you to kill everyone is a failure of what it means to be a stealth game. A game like mark of the ninja where you can avoid everything with the right moves is the mark of a good stealth game.

That said, it really depends for me. I remember back in Metal gear solid I would kill everyone, however in Dues Ex: Human revolution when I went into the police station I absolutely wouldnt kill any cops because theyre cops. Theyre just trying to do their jobs

So as usual, its not one way or the other for me. Context is important

 

[Summerstorm]

Usually no killing... well, accidents happen. But no reason to murder my way through everything. Especially innocent people just doing their job.

I remember for example: I was pretty non-lethal in "Deus Ex 3", just killing some gangers here and there if i was pressed and had to dish out fast. So only in self-defense.., (basically)

But i went total apeshit on the mercenaries when they attacked the coffin-hotel and murdered civilians. They showed no mercy... so i didn't either. None of them left alive.

 

[Korten12]

I tend to not kill in stealth games. I feel like if you just kill than your bad at your job (in universe that is.) Main reason the new thief game annoys me. He's a thief, not an assassin, yet they have made him an assassin. Or more accurately they made Garret into Corvo from Dishonored, just without powers and quick times events. :/

 

[J Tyran]

If you're playing a stealthy assassin, not killing makes you a pretty terrible one.

I also thought a game like Dishonored was a bait and switch. Why play a character with all these awesome magical abilities, ideally used to make the act of killing discretely easier, if the best possible ending is obtained by playing as a pacifist?

I guess the swords, firearms, and voodoo are all for showmanship?

More than likely these are dubious design choices.

Gotta say this disappointed me with Dishonoured too, even though I love the game to bits. The lethal gameplay is so much more fun, all the creative ways to cause take out enemies yet you get the shit ending if you do. Same with the targets in some cases too, getting to them and discreetly killing them is sometimes much more fun although in other cases the non lethal options are more fun to do as well.

 

[MammothBlade]

If you do it right all you have to do is press one button, or mash one until they pass out.
That's more of a QTE.

Then we come to the whole problem of QTE/button mashing. No thanks. And it's still violence. I'm not saying that out of pacifism, but because it's not what stealth should be about. Sure, hitting them from behind should have a chance to kill or incapacitate them immediately, but the uncertainty of that would make it more risky to take on enemies even from behind.

This I like, especially if you can disguise yourself like in Hitman. Would be more believable if he didn't have such a distinct look.

He needs to use shades and a wig.

With facial recognition technology, I reckon disguise will have to up the ante. How about someone with shape-shifting abilities? They still have to maintain the cover of being in that role. Maybe there's a limit to how long they can hold a certain form.

That or just making recognition more likely over the entire game if you blow your cover.

 

[GigaHz]

Hahaha no. Assassins (at least professionals) don't kill indiscriminately. They have a specific target. Killing faceless mooks is silly for any assassin worth their salt.

Obviously there are degrees of separation between a mass murderer and an assassin, but no where did I say in either of my comments 'Kill indiscriminately'.

But see, pacifists don't kill, and that there-in lies the problem. My argument is that a pacifist assassin is basically an oxymoron.

 

[w9496]

On one hand I always try to go for non-lethal takedowns. On the other hand, I fly into a blood fueled killing rage the moment I'm spotted and continue killing until the mission is over.

I voted Mercy because I at least attempt to knock'em out.

 

[Xan Krieger]

I kill out of the fear they'll wake up later. Better to kill them once instead of having to knock them out repeatedly. I'll only do non-lethal if it's more convenient (the gas grenade in DE:HR being a very, very convenient weapon) or if it's gonna have an effect later in the game that makes things easier (the Sorrow boss battle in MGS3 for example).

 

[NSGrendel]

I usually set an explosion to attract everyone to the same spot.

Then I detonate the secondaries.