Gooscar said:
Heh, LARPers.
I will give you that there's a sudden omnisciant "ZOMG IAN DEAD KILL 101 GUY!" reaction at Arefu that doesn't make sense.
From what I understand, Ian and Arefu are the two things you can't kill, otherwise you fail the quest. It's simply railroaded and programmed that Ian has to live if you want to do good.
No - I wanted to let Ian live. I killed Lance and became an enemy of Arefu. You can not kill anyone in The Family w/o becoming an enemy of Arefu.
I am speaking from a point when a) you have convinced Ian to go home, but you have not yet made any sort of deal with Lance.
The point here is that what I feel is a very 'normal' decision - wanting to return Ian to his sister and kill The Family - is not a valid part of Beth's decision tree and results in minor game breaking errors (such as Arefu hating you). Bad coding. Terrible quest.
Betamonkey said:
I still think you are gravely mistaken about the nature of the Family though. It all made perfect sense to me. They were being hunted because they had uncontrollable urges. That doesn't make them evil. In our world they would get medical and psychiatric help, something that doesn't exist in the wasteland.
But I do appreciate the irony of people complaining about one of the greyer choices that isn't completely black and white. Wink
You can not dole out 'karma points' and still call it a 'grey area'. Killing someone isn't 'grey' when you get or lose karma points for it - it's very clearly delineated as good or evil.
And I'm complaining because it's a ridiculous situation. I'm shocked that a bunch of morons claiming they can only drink blood makes 'perfect sense' to you. I submit that any wastelander would eat 300 year old noodles if they found them, and certainly wouldn't wait for a blood meal.
And more importantly, any group that large that DID wait for blood meals would need to be on constant killing sprees, making them evil.
And even if they simply slaughtered Brahmin, such as when they killed those of Arefu, in doing so they would have been condemning an entire town to die by destroying their natural resources. Once again, evil.
It is not a 'grey' moral choice when the only 'good' choice I'm allowed to take is to befriend a bunch of idiots and set them up as protectors of another town. That isn't grey at all, that's clearly the 'good' option in Beth's Fallout 3 based on Karmic distribution.
Too bad it's not only 'not good', but moronic.
Betamonkey said:
Which shows how much you actually just don't get it.. if you have played it at all.
"Cannibalism for fun" is NOT the way of the family. They hate the way they are, but they cannot help it. The hunger takes over and they do terrible things and people want to kill them for it.
I do find it funny that for all the crying about "Black hats and white knights, binary Bethesda sucks!" so many seem to be struggling with some of the gray areas.
Irony is certainly appreciated. Wink
I realize you aren't responding to me here, and I've definitely 'played' it. Cannibalism 'for fun' IS exactly what they are doing. They dress and act like Vampires! They are cultists, brainwashed by Lance (who even pretty much admits it). They are playing dress up.
You keep talking about 'the hunger taking over'. Do you realize how stupid this sounds in a post-apocalyptic wasteland? If you met someone who killed people because 'the hunger took over' tomorrow, in real life, would you think them good? I'd hope not, since they are not only bat shit insane, but murderous. The same goes in a wasteland. They don't get a 'get out of jail free' card simply because they live in a wasteland, if anything, there crimes are even more heinous since in such a world the positive efforts of every last individual are very important. Killing some cattle in our world is a crime, sure, but in FO3 they were essentially killing all of Arefu by killing their cattle.
. 
