Deus Ex disagrees. Of course that's also the game where...
The totalitarian globalist technocracy sitting at the point-of-convergence for unchecked corporate & gov't power, and the UN army which serves as their public enforcement arm, are unambiguously the bad guys.
The far-right militia guys who have been designated as terrorists and who you are encouraged to kill on sight turn out to be good guys fighting for the interests of the people against said technocracy.
The avant-garde Situationist-style leftist rebels you run into later are pretty useless in a fight and will themselves agree that they'd all be dead without you, unlike the militiamen above who keep on trucking after you pummel the crap out of them in the first couple levels.
Literally every media outlet is under the control of the technocratic conspiracy, even the one that seems 'based' and on the side of freedom at first glance.
Perhaps most importantly, the game doesn't judge you for your actions and consistently gives you a huge degree of freedom to do whatever you want to do, all the way to the ending(s).
Yeah, I can see why Jacobin might have a problem with all that.
The push for the parts recall in Human Revolution reminds me so much of the push for the bad today. And not taking it was the correct choice too because the corps had a backdoor implemented in the new part. Lol
Sure is. But as the other poster said, the Squeenix games are pozzed. Augs Lives Matter and a general pivot to 'racism bad' are the order of the day in Nu-DX, where the 2000 original talks about the Rothschilds and has actual deep insights & criticisms to offer about political systems & philosophies, even (perhaps especially) Western liberal democracies.
Yeah, the Augmented Rights Coalition. Who are STILL shown to be good guys with a righteous cause at their core, suffering only from the (mis)guidance of the Illuminati plant. You meet their founder and he's shown to be an unambiguously good guy, the implication being that there was nothing wrong with the group until the Illuminati put Marchenko in control - IOW, what saner BLM defenders will say about tge riots while ignoring the org's actual ideology or how its founders explicitly identify as trained Marxists, done unironically.
Plus the game's best ending involves them getting what they want re:aug control legislation. Unlike previous games where you get a choice of who to side with and each faction gives you wildly different outcomes, MD's endings are variations of one ending determined by whether you pass or fail certain conditions.
Anyway, DX1 did this 'good org subverted by conspirators' thing much better in 2000 with Silhouette, the avant-garde rebels I mentioned previously. The game doesn't go out of its way to get you to agree with them in every regard but methods and there's signs of them being under Illuminati influence even before they're outright absorbed by the Illuminati in Invisible War.
"If Eidos Montreal gives a crap about black folks and diversity/inclusion, they would stop using that image to promote the game," tweeted Manveer Heir, a designer at the game studio Bioware Montreal, located just down the street from Eidos.
'Don't try to spread hate, thanks' says Eidos's brand manager responded to Heir, saying the art was created before the Black Lives Matter movement started in 2013. He called it an "unfortunate coincidence."
"Of course I'm a visible minority myself, and understand the current tension," Andre Vu tweeted. "I get your point but we never use BLM, we don't reference to the current issues happening in the world. Don't try to spread hate, thanks."
I like to think of DX as true prophecy. In that the original writers would probably vehemently disagree with some of the conclusions that we come to regarding what they meant - and maybe they really just wanted to stuff in as many weird-sounding conspiracy theories as they could - but they were unknowingly tapped into a hyper-awareness of truth that made the game both feel realistic and become prophetic. In other words, if it's based it's accidentally so because that's reality.
Deus Ex disagrees. Of course that's also the game where...
The totalitarian globalist technocracy sitting at the point-of-convergence for unchecked corporate & gov't power, and the UN army which serves as their public enforcement arm, are unambiguously the bad guys.
The far-right militia guys who have been designated as terrorists and who you are encouraged to kill on sight turn out to be good guys fighting for the interests of the people against said technocracy.
The avant-garde Situationist-style leftist rebels you run into later are pretty useless in a fight and will themselves agree that they'd all be dead without you, unlike the militiamen above who keep on trucking after you pummel the crap out of them in the first couple levels.
Literally every media outlet is under the control of the technocratic conspiracy, even the one that seems 'based' and on the side of freedom at first glance.
Perhaps most importantly, the game doesn't judge you for your actions and consistently gives you a huge degree of freedom to do whatever you want to do, all the way to the ending(s).
Yeah, I can see why Jacobin might have a problem with all that.
The push for the parts recall in Human Revolution reminds me so much of the push for the bad today. And not taking it was the correct choice too because the corps had a backdoor implemented in the new part. Lol
Is Deus Ex really that based? I just recall it from the Never Asked for This meme and the glasses.
Sure is. But as the other poster said, the Squeenix games are pozzed. Augs Lives Matter and a general pivot to 'racism bad' are the order of the day in Nu-DX, where the 2000 original talks about the Rothschilds and has actual deep insights & criticisms to offer about political systems & philosophies, even (perhaps especially) Western liberal democracies.
You mean a movement hijacked by extremist terrorists who also serve as puppets of the conspiracy?
Yeah, the Augmented Rights Coalition. Who are STILL shown to be good guys with a righteous cause at their core, suffering only from the (mis)guidance of the Illuminati plant. You meet their founder and he's shown to be an unambiguously good guy, the implication being that there was nothing wrong with the group until the Illuminati put Marchenko in control - IOW, what saner BLM defenders will say about tge riots while ignoring the org's actual ideology or how its founders explicitly identify as trained Marxists, done unironically.
Plus the game's best ending involves them getting what they want re:aug control legislation. Unlike previous games where you get a choice of who to side with and each faction gives you wildly different outcomes, MD's endings are variations of one ending determined by whether you pass or fail certain conditions.
Anyway, DX1 did this 'good org subverted by conspirators' thing much better in 2000 with Silhouette, the avant-garde rebels I mentioned previously. The game doesn't go out of its way to get you to agree with them in every regard but methods and there's signs of them being under Illuminati influence even before they're outright absorbed by the Illuminati in Invisible War.
Also:
The original games also literally had the Mass Effect 3 ending before ME was even a thing and it did the 3 way choice right.
Yes. The newer games are not though
I like to think of DX as true prophecy. In that the original writers would probably vehemently disagree with some of the conclusions that we come to regarding what they meant - and maybe they really just wanted to stuff in as many weird-sounding conspiracy theories as they could - but they were unknowingly tapped into a hyper-awareness of truth that made the game both feel realistic and become prophetic. In other words, if it's based it's accidentally so because that's reality.
The older games will ram an entire bottle of red pills down your throat then ask if you want seconds.
Spoilers, they're suppositories.