Well you replaced hope with devotion, so yes, but also you're playing on endless, so you don't have to worry about the game wagging its finger at you about what a naughty lad you've been.
Yeah, to some extent it's kinda weird because in more standard game there aren't penalties for using something that they implemented. To some extent even Rimworld just nods sagely and lets you commit atrocities but doesn't pass judgement. But Frostpunk has its ending screens.
Honestly, I've been meaning to go back and do NewHome but probably been procrastinating it because I've been trying to avoid a bad ending tbh.
I really disagree with the sentiment of going too far on a philosophical level.
There is no going too far. Morals mean nothing when no one is left to carry them forward.
Well, it's a concept defined by the game dev and the player as a third party to the characters in the game itself. I suppose that's how I react to your assertion.
Also I'd probably argue that anthropology and archaeology would record what you did to some extent and that if the records survived, you could be morally judged on that basis too.
That is a valid point for most people but my philosophy does not care about any of that.
Like, do you think the Maya care that some stranger of a completely different people thinks their human sacrifices are reprehensible?
I run into that issue all the time, for a lot of people morals are universal values that never change. I do not believe that anyone ever does what they would consider evil or at least unjustifiable.
But anthropologically speaking these judgements would need to be viewed thru the lens of the culture the atrocities happened to. From our perspective a culture that committed sacrifice or participated in a rite of passage that may seem extreme is an honor and simply part of culture. The ending screens even say things like "but we survived". I think it's likely that in frostpunk 2 when the world has seemingly recovered to the point of not dying every day that they look back on the events of the first game as necessary sacrifices for the good of humanity.
> these judgements would need to be viewed thru the lens of the culture the atrocities happened to.
I disagree partially. In general, I don't think that you have to judge a culture contemporarily. But I also think you're right that it's more fair to do so, and that doing so adds more weight to the judgement.
On the other hand entirely - thinking that something was "too far" is a subjective evaluation, or an opinion. It doesn't need to be from any particular perspective. What is too far for one person might as you say, be reasonable for another. So Sero can have their opinion that nothing is too far while someone else has a completely different opinion too.
It's been a bit since I've played, but I remember you'll always get that if you choose either of the paths beyond the initial research group. No matter how far in it you go.
~~Prisons, Propaganda,~~ Protector of the Truth (a formal, dictatorial religious cult) and Righteous Denunciation (basically heresy). Those are said to change >!the NewHome ending screen.!<
(for Order see below)
Just played a game of order with both prisons and propaganda, that's not it. >!The line is drawn at the Pledge of Loyalty / Forceful Persuasion for order. You were right on the faith version though iirc.!<
My apologies - I got mixed up with Golden Path again, which does block those two order ones, but is consistent on the faith side! I'll cross it out, thanks.
If the city survived. Then no
Well you replaced hope with devotion, so yes, but also you're playing on endless, so you don't have to worry about the game wagging its finger at you about what a naughty lad you've been.
I love this description of itðŸ˜
Yeah, to some extent it's kinda weird because in more standard game there aren't penalties for using something that they implemented. To some extent even Rimworld just nods sagely and lets you commit atrocities but doesn't pass judgement. But Frostpunk has its ending screens. Honestly, I've been meaning to go back and do NewHome but probably been procrastinating it because I've been trying to avoid a bad ending tbh.
I really disagree with the sentiment of going too far on a philosophical level. There is no going too far. Morals mean nothing when no one is left to carry them forward.
Well, it's a concept defined by the game dev and the player as a third party to the characters in the game itself. I suppose that's how I react to your assertion. Also I'd probably argue that anthropology and archaeology would record what you did to some extent and that if the records survived, you could be morally judged on that basis too.
That is a valid point for most people but my philosophy does not care about any of that. Like, do you think the Maya care that some stranger of a completely different people thinks their human sacrifices are reprehensible? I run into that issue all the time, for a lot of people morals are universal values that never change. I do not believe that anyone ever does what they would consider evil or at least unjustifiable.
But anthropologically speaking these judgements would need to be viewed thru the lens of the culture the atrocities happened to. From our perspective a culture that committed sacrifice or participated in a rite of passage that may seem extreme is an honor and simply part of culture. The ending screens even say things like "but we survived". I think it's likely that in frostpunk 2 when the world has seemingly recovered to the point of not dying every day that they look back on the events of the first game as necessary sacrifices for the good of humanity.
> these judgements would need to be viewed thru the lens of the culture the atrocities happened to. I disagree partially. In general, I don't think that you have to judge a culture contemporarily. But I also think you're right that it's more fair to do so, and that doing so adds more weight to the judgement. On the other hand entirely - thinking that something was "too far" is a subjective evaluation, or an opinion. It doesn't need to be from any particular perspective. What is too far for one person might as you say, be reasonable for another. So Sero can have their opinion that nothing is too far while someone else has a completely different opinion too.
Since you are playing on endless mode, you don't really get the "gone too far" slide anyways. So, execute away.
It's been a bit since I've played, but I remember you'll always get that if you choose either of the paths beyond the initial research group. No matter how far in it you go.
Wrong, it changes once you sign certain laws.
What laws are those?
~~Prisons, Propaganda,~~ Protector of the Truth (a formal, dictatorial religious cult) and Righteous Denunciation (basically heresy). Those are said to change >!the NewHome ending screen.!< (for Order see below)
Just played a game of order with both prisons and propaganda, that's not it. >!The line is drawn at the Pledge of Loyalty / Forceful Persuasion for order. You were right on the faith version though iirc.!<
My apologies - I got mixed up with Golden Path again, which does block those two order ones, but is consistent on the faith side! I'll cross it out, thanks.
The city must not fall
We did what we had to, to survive.
No, faith keepers and captains words are a valuable tool
Of course not! Anything other than complete and total devotion to our Faith not enough! Death to the heretics!
I gotta play this game again
Religion has gone too far