The first time I played through the original Dark Souls, the choice seemed obvious: link the fire, save the world. The “Good” ending, or so I thought.
Nobody except guide readers even know there is additional endings. There is absolutely zero reason for you to question the basic narrative unless you do things extremely bizarrely and find Kaathe. Which I doubt this bitch did because its actually hard to do.
whether this spooky Age of Dark is really all that bad.
You are given absolutely zero reason to think this. The question isn't that the Age of Dark is good. Its that it isn't worth the sacrifice to avoid it. Its inevitable, and requires more and more horrors each time to avoid. Its always bad, its worshipers are obviously evil compared to the Age of Fire supporters who are more vaguely "ends justify means."
This is entirely contrarian bullshit based on no evidence. Its the same shit that draws women to Paganism and Satanism, entirely because "I wanna do what you don't want me to and be edgy!"
they were bound by the Undead Curse to continually—and unnaturally—restore the gods’ fading power.
What power? The God's are all dead, weakened, and dying. You are restoring their ability to maintain the world. Not to grant them lordship and superiority. 2 of the original 4 Lords literally ruined themselves trying to power it themselves. They gave more than you ever could in pursuit of the same goals.
As this sentence is the basis of her entire "thesis" it completely falls apart. Are the super elites throwing themselves into the fire to sustain our system like Gwyn/The Witch did? Is Soros dead broke from investing in charities to those out of work? If not then this entire waste of words falls apart and just becomes another generic "omg this is just like in Harry Potter where..." bullshit.
Notice as well, she doesn't even mention Dark Souls 2, because its too controversial and therefore won't get the same level of clickbait. But it would actually benefit her argument to talk about all of those who tried to break or change the cycle to varying degrees of success. Including one who escaped the Curse of Undeath entirely.
*I have no played the DLC for 3 if that has relevant differences in the lore.
In DS1 the dark is most definitely meant to be seen as something to fear. Like, once you look in to it you realize that dark might not be bad but the game definitely wants you to think it’s scary what with the darkwraiths and new Londo being so horrifyingly designed as well as a bunch of items that literally describe like the 4 kings or lifedrain as evil. We don’t actually know it’s neutral until DS2 introduces the cycles.
Right, and you are given zero reason to think otherwise. All the proponents of the Age of Dark are evil monsters and a much less trustworthy talking snake. We only get an inkling towards it because the Age of Fire promoters are very morally dubious in their pursuit and did some fucky stuff.
So trapped in binary thought that when offered a not perfect shade of white character, she assumes that must mean the other side is meant to be the good one.
And as she offered zero mention of DS2, I assume she knows nothing of it and therefore is completely ignorant of its lore. And not willfully so like the rest of us.
Nobody except guide readers even know there is additional endings. There is absolutely zero reason for you to question the basic narrative unless you do things extremely bizarrely and find Kaathe. Which I doubt this bitch did because its actually hard to do.
You are given absolutely zero reason to think this. The question isn't that the Age of Dark is good. Its that it isn't worth the sacrifice to avoid it. Its inevitable, and requires more and more horrors each time to avoid. Its always bad, its worshipers are obviously evil compared to the Age of Fire supporters who are more vaguely "ends justify means."
This is entirely contrarian bullshit based on no evidence. Its the same shit that draws women to Paganism and Satanism, entirely because "I wanna do what you don't want me to and be edgy!"
What power? The God's are all dead, weakened, and dying. You are restoring their ability to maintain the world. Not to grant them lordship and superiority. 2 of the original 4 Lords literally ruined themselves trying to power it themselves. They gave more than you ever could in pursuit of the same goals.
As this sentence is the basis of her entire "thesis" it completely falls apart. Are the super elites throwing themselves into the fire to sustain our system like Gwyn/The Witch did? Is Soros dead broke from investing in charities to those out of work? If not then this entire waste of words falls apart and just becomes another generic "omg this is just like in Harry Potter where..." bullshit.
Notice as well, she doesn't even mention Dark Souls 2, because its too controversial and therefore won't get the same level of clickbait. But it would actually benefit her argument to talk about all of those who tried to break or change the cycle to varying degrees of success. Including one who escaped the Curse of Undeath entirely.
*I have no played the DLC for 3 if that has relevant differences in the lore.
In DS1 the dark is most definitely meant to be seen as something to fear. Like, once you look in to it you realize that dark might not be bad but the game definitely wants you to think it’s scary what with the darkwraiths and new Londo being so horrifyingly designed as well as a bunch of items that literally describe like the 4 kings or lifedrain as evil. We don’t actually know it’s neutral until DS2 introduces the cycles.
Right, and you are given zero reason to think otherwise. All the proponents of the Age of Dark are evil monsters and a much less trustworthy talking snake. We only get an inkling towards it because the Age of Fire promoters are very morally dubious in their pursuit and did some fucky stuff.
So trapped in binary thought that when offered a not perfect shade of white character, she assumes that must mean the other side is meant to be the good one.
And as she offered zero mention of DS2, I assume she knows nothing of it and therefore is completely ignorant of its lore. And not willfully so like the rest of us.