The "Bad Guy" in Dark Souls

    Share
    avatar
    GhosTAnoynmouS
    Newbie
    Newbie

    Posts : 16
    Reputation : 0
    Join date : 2013-04-17
    Location : abyss

    Re: The "Bad Guy" in Dark Souls

    Post by GhosTAnoynmouS on Thu Apr 18, 2013 10:18 pm

    have you ever heard of the bouncing ball theory? its a theory (and im going to explain this as simply as humanly possible) that tries to describe the death and birth og the universe i was actually waiting for you to refer to the flame as the big bang and to that i say EXACTLY! our universe formed with the big bang and expanded but soon or maybe even now it will be/is in the proceess of "contracting" or coming back together where everything will collide and erupt in yet another big bang. explaing how the death of a universe is also the spark to start a new one and i believe the bonfire is the exact same. and i believe the age of dark is equal to the age of dragons (immortal dragons who have domain over the whole planet sounds alot like what will happen in the age of darkness with the hollows)now that last part is a huge stretch which im not even sure of myself we dont fully know what an age of dark really entails but i personally believe it isnt worth even a single life to try and perserve something that is already gone kinda like how a child needs to learn to let go of its first dead pet.


    _________________
    -honor-
    avatar
    Shkar
    Revived
    Revived

    Posts : 2657
    Reputation : 101
    Join date : 2012-03-18

    Re: The "Bad Guy" in Dark Souls

    Post by Shkar on Thu Apr 18, 2013 10:21 pm

    twilightwarwolf wrote:even so how do we REALLY know that the flame burning is the "right" thing as DkS doesnt have a black and white sides? its not like we put out a flame and boom suddenly we dont have time and space or differences.

    The flame has never truly burned out, so yes, we can not know that for sure. But when the flame is burning bright, the world is right; people are not cursed with turning into zombies, and the sun rises.

    When the flame starts to burn down and die, the opposite occurs; the dead start to walk again as mindless beasts, and the sun goes away.

    It doesn't take a genius to tell that there must be some kind of link there. The connection is obvious. People make more ridiculous connections in there everyday lives; "If I don't wear my jersey, my team will lose!" "Every time I smack my TV, it comes into focus."

    It's like saying, "Yeah, every time the fire gets low it gets dark and cold. I'm sure that it won't get worse when it goes out completely though."

    Again, the writers picked a flame for a reason.


    _________________
    XBL GT: DeadlyHeretic
    avatar
    twilightwarwolf
    Revived
    Revived

    Posts : 2582
    Reputation : 23
    Join date : 2012-08-11
    Age : 20
    Location : with my pack of wolves

    Re: The "Bad Guy" in Dark Souls

    Post by twilightwarwolf on Thu Apr 18, 2013 10:22 pm

    sir im going to have to call bull to your idea of this universe as we arent contracting but perhaps in the DkS world that is whats happening though i ask this if they were to even allow this to go on forever you realize that eventually it WILL go out.\

    EDIT: shkar how in the world did you get that idea? you say it always that because the flame burns low this starts to happen (which if your right it makes sense that i dont deny) but what is your proof because i can garuntee most things in DkS are not like you are trying to say black and white.


    _________________
    THE EXILED OF ARIAMIS hunt, with fierce dedication, those who enter the Painted World...Our Realm...and contemplate harm toward Our Queen. We also seek retribution for the past wrongs done to Our Queen and those She shelters.

    You learn more from failure than from success.

    "People have a lot of questions, So do I." Morgan Freeman

    "I'm not racist, I'm a pianist, I push down both black and white"
    avatar
    Shkar
    Revived
    Revived

    Posts : 2657
    Reputation : 101
    Join date : 2012-03-18

    Re: The "Bad Guy" in Dark Souls

    Post by Shkar on Thu Apr 18, 2013 10:26 pm

    twilightwarwolf wrote:sir im going to have to call bull to your idea of this universe as we arent contracting but perhaps in the DkS world that is whats happening though i ask this if they were to even allow this to go on forever you realize that eventually it WILL go out.

    Says who? Gwyn linked the flame and it lasted another thousand years to where we are now. We have no clue how long it will last this time. Yes, it may progress less and less each time; that is quite possible. But any time you can add to the possible extinction of the human race, even if it is mere hours, is well worth one life. Hell, if you don't do it you'll die anyway in a few hours.

    GhosTAnoynmouS wrote:have you ever heard of the bouncing ball theory? its a theory (and im going to explain this as simply as humanly possible) that tries to describe the death and birth og the universe i was actually waiting for you to refer to the flame as the big bang and to that i say EXACTLY! our universe formed with the big bang and expanded but soon or maybe even now it will be/is in the proceess of "contracting" or coming back together where everything will collide and erupt in yet another big bang. explaing how the death of a universe is also the spark to start a new one and i believe the bonfire is the exact same. and i believe the age of dark is equal to the age of dragons (immortal dragons who have domain over the whole planet sounds alot like what will happen in the age of darkness with the hollows)now that last part is a huge stretch which im not even sure of myself we dont fully know what an age of dark really entails but i personally believe it isnt worth even a single life to try and perserve something that is already gone kinda like how a child needs to learn to let go of its first dead pet.

    The world's best scientists can't come to a unanimous decision that that's what the universe is like. Ever heard of continuous growth? Or the heat death of the universe?

    While it's possible that the writers made the flame to be an allegory for the Big Bang, that seems like a stretch to me. But even so, if the Big Bang were like the flame and it's timer could be reset by a sacrifice every time it started to unwind, you can bet I would let someone sacrifice themselves every ~50 trillion years or so to save every other person, ever.

    twilightwarwolf wrote:
    EDIT: shkar how in the world did you get that idea? you say it always that because the flame burns low this starts to happen (which if your right it makes sense that i dont deny) but what is your proof because i can garuntee most things in DkS are not like you are trying to say black and white.

    The intro.

    "Thus began the Age of Fire. . .But soon, the flames will fade, and only Dark will remain.Even now, there are only embers, and man sees not light, but only endless nights.
    And amongst the living are seen, carriers of the accursed Darksign."


    Have you ever taken a literature class? As annoying as they can be (very much so), I have found that the one I have taken has really made it easier to understand the author's intent for this game.

    One thing you learn in those types of classes is that good writers never include something for nothing. You can't just wave your hand at evidence and say "no" without good counter-evidence. So, since they specifically linked the "endless nights" and "accursed Darksign" parts with "soon, the flames will fade," that makes it significant.


    Last edited by Shkar on Thu Apr 18, 2013 10:30 pm; edited 1 time in total


    _________________
    XBL GT: DeadlyHeretic
    avatar
    GhosTAnoynmouS
    Newbie
    Newbie

    Posts : 16
    Reputation : 0
    Join date : 2013-04-17
    Location : abyss

    Re: The "Bad Guy" in Dark Souls

    Post by GhosTAnoynmouS on Thu Apr 18, 2013 10:28 pm

    and in your scenario about trying to keep the sun burning the world is still alive and well if you wanted a proper likeness you would have to have it so that the world was also mostless midless zombies. so if the world was in a situation like that where there was no way of regaining or improving the state at which its in and its already in a god-awful state is it really worth saving? and even if it is that isnt the question is it? no. it isnt, the question is would it be wrong to just let it end naturally and let it all recycle like how it was meant to? noits not and with that logic i believe that no the dark lord ending isnt bad and that was the whole point of all this neither is bad nor good just subject of opinion and belief and while i understand your points for linking the flame i only see it as pointless, meaningless, and unjustified.just my own opinion.i too would offer myself to link the flames but it woukld in the end be futile and make no real difference


    _________________
    -honor-
    avatar
    GhosTAnoynmouS
    Newbie
    Newbie

    Posts : 16
    Reputation : 0
    Join date : 2013-04-17
    Location : abyss

    Re: The "Bad Guy" in Dark Souls

    Post by GhosTAnoynmouS on Thu Apr 18, 2013 10:32 pm

    but your not saving anyone,its aklready gone my friend. its already over. but we are off topic now like i said before the original question is if there is a bad or good ending at all and i think i have made a good case in sayong no and furthermore that the dark lord ending has its own justifications


    Last edited by GhosTAnoynmouS on Thu Apr 18, 2013 10:34 pm; edited 1 time in total


    _________________
    -honor-
    avatar
    Shkar
    Revived
    Revived

    Posts : 2657
    Reputation : 101
    Join date : 2012-03-18

    Re: The "Bad Guy" in Dark Souls

    Post by Shkar on Thu Apr 18, 2013 10:33 pm

    GhosTAnoynmouS wrote:and in your scenario about trying to keep the sun burning the world is still alive and well if you wanted a proper likeness you would have to have it so that the world was also mostless midless zombies. so if the world was in a situation like that where there was no way of regaining or improving the state at which its in and its already in a god-awful state is it really worth saving? and even if it is that isnt the question is it? no. it isnt, the question is would it be wrong to just let it end naturally and let it all recycle like how it was meant to? noits not and with that logic i believe that no the dark lord ending isnt bad and that was the whole point of all this neither is bad nor good just subject of opinion and belief and while i understand your points for linking the flame i only see it as pointless, meaningless, and unjustified.just my own opinion.i too would offer myself to link the flames but it woukld in the end be futile and make no real difference

    Forgive me for saying so, but I will never elect you to any kind of powerful office then. Anyone who would elect to deny their own race their only chance at survival, who would rather go extinct than face a challenge, is not someone who should have the power to make that choice.

    You say it's pointless to prevent the flame because it's "inevitably" going to die out? Do you feel the same way about seeking medical attention for a gunshot or (random disease here) cancer because they are just going to die eventually anyway?

    It's basically the same choice, but one you are forcing on every person still alive.

    GhosTAnoynmouS wrote:but your not saving anyone,its aklready gone my friend. its already over

    The flame is still there. Weak and dying, sure. Already dead? Not yet.

    Heck, if it's already gone then what makes the dark lord ending so good? If it's already over, you're just barging into a man's resting place and brutally killing him (again) for no reason.


    _________________
    XBL GT: DeadlyHeretic
    avatar
    GhosTAnoynmouS
    Newbie
    Newbie

    Posts : 16
    Reputation : 0
    Join date : 2013-04-17
    Location : abyss

    Re: The "Bad Guy" in Dark Souls

    Post by GhosTAnoynmouS on Thu Apr 18, 2013 10:40 pm

    those arent the same circumstances in all those cases there is still hope and (from what we have seen in the game) there is none of that in all of lordran. there is no hope for it, and on regards to the choice i would personally make well i certainly wouldnt link the fires however im not fully convinced its the switching of a lightswitch if i choose to abandon the bonfire, i feel there is more hope for something better to happen if the player abandons the last bonfire. the way i see it is keeping things the way they are where its a hell already, or giving us the chance for something better. all that dies with the flames that we know for sure are the lords powers, and incase you forgot you slayed them all already


    _________________
    -honor-
    avatar
    GhosTAnoynmouS
    Newbie
    Newbie

    Posts : 16
    Reputation : 0
    Join date : 2013-04-17
    Location : abyss

    Re: The "Bad Guy" in Dark Souls

    Post by GhosTAnoynmouS on Thu Apr 18, 2013 10:44 pm

    i agree with you on the last part, if i were to abandon the bonfire myself i would not have busted in there and killed gwyn to end it abruptly and maybe we discovered a possible third ending we didnt see before and that is the option of not linking the flames but also not rushing in there to end it now, no player is forced to finish the game so theoretically speaking you could say thats the third ending, not ending it at all just letting it take its due course and thats what i would do. let nature run its path i dont want to be the dark lord anyways


    _________________
    -honor-
    avatar
    Shkar
    Revived
    Revived

    Posts : 2657
    Reputation : 101
    Join date : 2012-03-18

    Re: The "Bad Guy" in Dark Souls

    Post by Shkar on Thu Apr 18, 2013 10:45 pm

    GhosTAnoynmouS wrote:those arent the same circumstances in all those cases there is still hope and (from what we have seen in the game) there is none of that in all of lordran. there is no hope for it, and on regards to the choice i would personally make well i certainly wouldnt link the fires however im not fully convinced its the switching of a lightswitch if i choose to abandon the bonfire, i feel there is more hope for something better to happen if the player abandons the last bonfire. the way i see it is keeping things the way they are where its a hell already, or giving us the chance for something better. all that dies with the flames that we know for sure are the lords powers, and incase you forgot you slayed them all already

    The flame created life, and the soul is the source of life. The lords got their souls from the flame; logically, every other soul likely came from the flame in one way or another. If killing the flame removes all the gods powers, there is no sign that it would leave the humans with any; after all, the average person has, what, one humanity? That's not much to go on.

    And while the only living person in Lordran is, what, maybe Andre (his body sticks around, and he looks human), there are other countries out there. The Great Swamp, Carim, Catarina, Astora, Thorlund; several people talk of coming to Lordran "now that they're undead." That suggests they recently became undead.

    Which would mean that there have to be people who aren't.


    _________________
    XBL GT: DeadlyHeretic
    avatar
    twilightwarwolf
    Revived
    Revived

    Posts : 2582
    Reputation : 23
    Join date : 2012-08-11
    Age : 20
    Location : with my pack of wolves

    Re: The "Bad Guy" in Dark Souls

    Post by twilightwarwolf on Thu Apr 18, 2013 10:48 pm

    Shkar wrote:
    twilightwarwolf wrote:sir im going to have to call bull to your idea of this universe as we arent contracting but perhaps in the DkS world that is whats happening though i ask this if they were to even allow this to go on forever you realize that eventually it WILL go out.

    Says who? Gwyn linked the flame and it lasted another thousand years to where we are now. We have no clue how long it will last this time. Yes, it may progress less and less each time; that is quite possible. But any time you can add to the possible extinction of the human race, even if it is mere hours, is well worth one life. Hell, if you don't do it you'll die anyway in a few hours.

    GhosTAnoynmouS wrote:have you ever heard of the bouncing ball theory? its a theory (and im going to explain this as simply as humanly possible) that tries to describe the death and birth og the universe i was actually waiting for you to refer to the flame as the big bang and to that i say EXACTLY! our universe formed with the big bang and expanded but soon or maybe even now it will be/is in the proceess of "contracting" or coming back together where everything will collide and erupt in yet another big bang. explaing how the death of a universe is also the spark to start a new one and i believe the bonfire is the exact same. and i believe the age of dark is equal to the age of dragons (immortal dragons who have domain over the whole planet sounds alot like what will happen in the age of darkness with the hollows)now that last part is a huge stretch which im not even sure of myself we dont fully know what an age of dark really entails but i personally believe it isnt worth even a single life to try and perserve something that is already gone kinda like how a child needs to learn to let go of its first dead pet.

    The world's best scientists can't come to a unanimous decision that that's what the universe is like. Ever heard of continuous growth? Or the heat death of the universe?

    While it's possible that the writers made the flame to be an allegory for the Big Bang, that seems like a stretch to me. But even so, if the Big Bang were like the flame and it's timer could be reset by a sacrifice every time it started to unwind, you can bet I would let someone sacrifice themselves every ~50 trillion years or so to save every other person, ever.

    twilightwarwolf wrote:
    EDIT: shkar how in the world did you get that idea? you say it always that because the flame burns low this starts to happen (which if your right it makes sense that i dont deny) but what is your proof because i can garuntee most things in DkS are not like you are trying to say black and white.

    The intro.

    "Thus began the Age of Fire. . .But soon, the flames will fade, and only Dark will remain.Even now, there are only embers, and man sees not light, but only endless nights.
    And amongst the living are seen, carriers of the accursed Darksign."


    Have you ever taken a literature class? As annoying as they can be (very much so), I have found that the one I have taken has really made it easier to understand the author's intent for this game.

    One thing you learn in those types of classes is that good writers never include something for nothing. You can't just wave your hand at evidence and say "no" without good counter-evidence. So, since they specifically linked the "endless nights" and "accursed Darksign" parts with "soon, the flames will fade," that makes it significant.

    "Thus began the Age of Fire. . .But soon, the flames will fade, and only Dark will remain.Even now, there are only embers, and man sees not light, but only endless nights.
    And amongst the living are seen, carriers of the accursed Darksign."

    you know this may not mean that it is literally the end as you seem to make it but it could be more a refernece several things.

    for one "man sees only endless nights" well hows this for counter evidence. We know the age of the dragons was in a fog and the world was unformed then came fire and bam we get age of the gods right? so if the age of man is next in line as kaathe says how is it impossible to find that maybe man sees endless nights as being how they must go from a world with gods to one without? or that they must start to take care of themselves instead of believing in/ depending on a god/gods?

    And secondly they never did link them together. they said that the flames are fading (which we know as truth) and that among people the darksign is becoming more evident. it never says that they are the cause and effect of the loss of the flames. and perhaps more people have had the darksign because the people with it all come from the first to have it and thus it spread and is now more out there than in hiding like perhaps it was before. think of it as a genetic trait that imo people in the religion in DkS have spread the idea of being one with a darksign as evil like religion in the world today say that the others are wrong and evil.


    _________________
    THE EXILED OF ARIAMIS hunt, with fierce dedication, those who enter the Painted World...Our Realm...and contemplate harm toward Our Queen. We also seek retribution for the past wrongs done to Our Queen and those She shelters.

    You learn more from failure than from success.

    "People have a lot of questions, So do I." Morgan Freeman

    "I'm not racist, I'm a pianist, I push down both black and white"
    avatar
    GrinTwist
    Chosen Undead
    Chosen Undead

    Posts : 4185
    Reputation : 98
    Join date : 2012-07-22
    Location : New Londo Ruins, Illinois: Living in Tart's torture chamber

    Re: The "Bad Guy" in Dark Souls

    Post by GrinTwist on Thu Apr 18, 2013 10:51 pm

    Allow me to charge topic with no knowledge of what you're all talking about.

    I always thought that within the Dark Souls universe we always had a shades of grey rather than a black and white image.

    I know people point to Kaathe as the true "bad guy" but it's possible that he had good intentions in what he was doing just as everyone else did (except for those torch hollows, they just want to see this world burn!)

    So I'd think this whole "bad guy" thing depends on the view of the person rather than all the facts of the game. That's what I always thought what made this game something of a tragedy they have motives that have good intentions (outside of the already listed and Petrus)

    So wouldn't it go against the game to put the blame of everything on one character rather than both misunderstanding and unfortunate events that lead up to what Lordran currently is?


    _________________
    Boring life? Join a cult.
    avatar
    twilightwarwolf
    Revived
    Revived

    Posts : 2582
    Reputation : 23
    Join date : 2012-08-11
    Age : 20
    Location : with my pack of wolves

    Re: The "Bad Guy" in Dark Souls

    Post by twilightwarwolf on Thu Apr 18, 2013 10:56 pm

    ya know... i have to admit grin you actually may have a point i had to read it over a few times to get it to sink in but you may be right. ill give it some more thought to make sure what i say is what i want to.


    _________________
    THE EXILED OF ARIAMIS hunt, with fierce dedication, those who enter the Painted World...Our Realm...and contemplate harm toward Our Queen. We also seek retribution for the past wrongs done to Our Queen and those She shelters.

    You learn more from failure than from success.

    "People have a lot of questions, So do I." Morgan Freeman

    "I'm not racist, I'm a pianist, I push down both black and white"
    avatar
    GhosTAnoynmouS
    Newbie
    Newbie

    Posts : 16
    Reputation : 0
    Join date : 2013-04-17
    Location : abyss

    Re: The "Bad Guy" in Dark Souls

    Post by GhosTAnoynmouS on Thu Apr 18, 2013 11:02 pm

    GhosTAnoynmouS wrote:the developers have stated that they originally wanted a covenant of Velka but couldn't because of constraints so i think they merged the ideas from that with the dark moon blade. so i don't think there is any tension between Gwyndolin and Velka dealing with the covenant. however i do think its interesting that its a crow that takes you away from the asylum and that it is also where the peculiar doll is found so i believe Velka plays a much larger role in our quests then we think and i think its obvious Gwyndolin isn't trying to stop you from reaching Gwyn seeing as he tells you to follow Frampt who is trying to direct you to doing just that. i also believe Gwyndolin was the one to cast all the illusions since he has an affinity for the moon which insinuates his ability with illusions, plus he also puts up an illusion in the form of the never ending hallway you battle him in (which in fact does end). i don't think there is a true evil just different agendas and desired ends. just like in the real world, when theres a war no one side is "evil" each side is fighting for something important to them and what is necessarily bad about that? bad is an object of personal view and opinion. so imo there is no bad side no real "evil" the game is meant to be extremely open for interpretation so its up to you to think who is bad and good



    thats exactly what i tried saying earlier there is no "bad" ending its only view and opinion they never intendid to have an absolute clearly undeniably evil in the game


    _________________
    -honor-
    avatar
    Shkar
    Revived
    Revived

    Posts : 2657
    Reputation : 101
    Join date : 2012-03-18

    Re: The "Bad Guy" in Dark Souls

    Post by Shkar on Thu Apr 18, 2013 11:09 pm

    A person can commit acts of good in the name of evil, just as a person can commit evil in the name of good.

    Whatever a person's intentions when committing evil, it is still evil. Nobody ever sees themselves as evil. Every terrorist and war criminal always thought they were in the right. But they weren't.

    As such, while one could drown the world in darkness while lying to themselves to say it's a kindness, they are still choosing to drown the world. And that is an evil act.




    "But soon, the flames will fade, and only Dark will remain. Even now, there are only embers, and man sees not light, but only endless nights."

    That link, right there. "Even now" is referring to time how a time hasn't quite happened, but is approaching. The only time mentioned is the flame fading.

    For evidence that the night part is literal, look at Anor Londo. You dispel the Gwynevere illusion, and the illusion of the sun fades as well.

    I ask you: Why would they need an illusion of sunlight? That seems like a massive effort for something that would provide no benefit, unless something was up with the sun.


    _________________
    XBL GT: DeadlyHeretic
    avatar
    twilightwarwolf
    Revived
    Revived

    Posts : 2582
    Reputation : 23
    Join date : 2012-08-11
    Age : 20
    Location : with my pack of wolves

    Re: The "Bad Guy" in Dark Souls

    Post by twilightwarwolf on Thu Apr 18, 2013 11:38 pm

    look ill be honest im not sure why maybe its dark there because by the timw you get there it has been awhile so assumed it was him liking the sun as his dad was the "Lord of Sunlight" and how he raves about the sun so thats what i think/thought.

    and shkar look at yourself you see a terrorist as evil because he killed your people but what if your people killed theirs first is that fair or right? no so can you seriously say that a sacrifice for something is good? maybe you cna but its not if you have to kill someone to do somethings its not right. just like you said that the terrorist who thinks he's doing good is actually evil.

    So in reality both ways are evil. sacrificing a person every so often to stop what NATURE intended is not right and the fact that we are stopping nature is imo wrong. And possibly dooming all because we dont know what will happend to lordran and the world is evil because we kill the fire which started "life" and may take it away. And who is one person to make that decision for the world. though again we DONT KNOW if that will happen so in all reality we may be stopping the right ending but we dont know.

    you also said earlier shkar that if you give up a chance to fight for the better than you wouldnt elect them in power right? well i must say wether you care or not i personally would not put you in a position of power as i myself am not worthy either. and why? because you would rather stick to what you know will "work" rather than give the world a chance at a freedom from whatever is causing the problems and allowing nature to continue as it is supposed to because what if that is how its supposed to go? then can you really say that its evil? no you cant its just how nature goes and if humans cant keep up well then they die like animals do.

    i do apologize for any rudeness and i do hope i havent offended anyone especially you Shkar. and yes im still supporting that the "Dark Lord ending" is good but thats my opinion which i am free to have and isnt any more incorrect than anyones.


    _________________
    THE EXILED OF ARIAMIS hunt, with fierce dedication, those who enter the Painted World...Our Realm...and contemplate harm toward Our Queen. We also seek retribution for the past wrongs done to Our Queen and those She shelters.

    You learn more from failure than from success.

    "People have a lot of questions, So do I." Morgan Freeman

    "I'm not racist, I'm a pianist, I push down both black and white"
    avatar
    Shkar
    Revived
    Revived

    Posts : 2657
    Reputation : 101
    Join date : 2012-03-18

    Re: The "Bad Guy" in Dark Souls

    Post by Shkar on Fri Apr 19, 2013 1:08 am

    twilightwarwolf wrote:look ill be honest im not sure why maybe its dark there because by the timw you get there it has been awhile so assumed it was him liking the sun as his dad was the "Lord of Sunlight" and how he raves about the sun so thats what i think/thought.

    and shkar look at yourself you see a terrorist as evil because he killed your people but what if your people killed theirs first is that fair or right? no so can you seriously say that a sacrifice for something is good? maybe you cna but its not if you have to kill someone to do somethings its not right. just like you said that the terrorist who thinks he's doing good is actually evil.

    So in reality both ways are evil. sacrificing a person every so often to stop what NATURE intended is not right and the fact that we are stopping nature is imo wrong. And possibly dooming all because we dont know what will happend to lordran and the world is evil because we kill the fire which started "life" and may take it away. And who is one person to make that decision for the world. though again we DONT KNOW if that will happen so in all reality we may be stopping the right ending but we dont know.

    you also said earlier shkar that if you give up a chance to fight for the better than you wouldnt elect them in power right? well i must say wether you care or not i personally would not put you in a position of power as i myself am not worthy either. and why? because you would rather stick to what you know will "work" rather than give the world a chance at a freedom from whatever is causing the problems and allowing nature to continue as it is supposed to because what if that is how its supposed to go? then can you really say that its evil? no you cant its just how nature goes and if humans cant keep up well then they die like animals do.

    i do apologize for any rudeness and i do hope i havent offended anyone especially you Shkar. and yes im still supporting that the "Dark Lord ending" is good but thats my opinion which i am free to have and isnt any more incorrect than anyones.

    Humanity has been defying nature since we first picked up a stick to fend off predators. Until the first use of tools, nature had always been about the strength of one's body; the strong predators killed the weak prey.

    Look at humanity now. We defy nature by sitting in buildings carved from nature, living in luxury in heat controlled rooms, and whizzing by ten times faster than nature ever intended to go in large metal contraptions simply to run to the store and get food, rather than go out and hunt it ourselves.

    To claim that "resisting nature" is wrong is to say that you wish to live life as an animal. Nature isn't some sentient organism that decides how life plays out. Nature is, quite simply, life. The whole point is to do what is best to keep your species alive, which is why species reproduce and evolve. It's all about the survival of the species.





    It is wrong to kill someone just to kill them. There are times, however, when lives must be sacrificed. Despite what people try to say, every human life does have a price. If you had ten dollars and could buy a drowning person a life-raft or buy enough water to save two people dying of thirst, which would you choose? Either way you are sacrificing life; you can not save all three people.

    Sacrifices are sometimes necessary in life, but they don't have to be involuntary. Yes, if you are the person drowning, it sucks that the person who could save you would likely save the two dehydrated people; unless those people are your wife and son, or your parents, or any other two people you care about.

    Even just acknowledging that you would rather save an 8-year old child with a heart transplant than a 95-year old man is admitting that human beings are, sometimes, expendable for the common good. I have never met an elderly person who would knowingly condemn a child to death so they could live a few months longer. That's just one example of an occasion where a sacrifice is understandable.




    In the end, I'm not arguing in favor of the light because the dark is unknown. This isn't, "Let's stay slaves! Freedom might be horrible, but we're alive right now!" it's "We may be able to survive the walk through the desert without our water bottles, but let's not take that risk."

    We have seen what the dark does when it runs wild. We know that the flame created life.

    NOBODY truly knows what will come out of extinguishing the flame. Nobody has ever lived in a world without it. Too extinguish it is taking a gamble; you are risking the possible death of the world, for the possibility that the "tyrant gods" will lose their powers. Personally, I think the evidence for the "death of the world" scenario is much stronger, but the evidence for the "overthrowing of the gods" scenario would have to be overwhelming before I would take those odds.


    _________________
    XBL GT: DeadlyHeretic

    Sponsored content

    Re: The "Bad Guy" in Dark Souls

    Post by Sponsored content


      Current date/time is Mon Aug 21, 2017 10:52 pm