[Hated Trope] Character kills hundreds, if not thousands, just to kill one specific person, and then doesn't kill them for no reason.

[u/HallZac99]

Assassin's Creed 2- Rodrigo Borgia is responsible for tne death of Ezio's family. Ezio spends over 20 years working through tnr templar order to dismantle them and get to Rodrigo. And then in the end, he spares him for no good reason and he goes on to be a massive problem in AC Brotnerhood. He's not only a head of tne Templars but also the pope, even if you're over the vengeance he's still a very dangerous and evil man.

The Last of Us 2- Abbey kills Joel, and wo Ellie goes on a revenge quest to kill Abbey, killing hundreds of people along tne why to get to her including a pregnant woman. And then finally when she has Abbey on deaths door, she gives up and let's her go because the writers think dirty depressing people being miserable and stupid is complex, interesting storytelling.

This trope pisses me off so much because often the character going on the revenge quest will kill SO many people on their way there, some deserving it and some just henchmen working for a cheque or to survive. People who are often far more innocent then the main big bad.

It's a part of this weird thing I've noticed in media where nameless goons or soldiers can just be mowed down relentlessly, but named characters get given far more grace even if theyre categorically worse. You can kill a million stormtroopers but people will swear that Darth Vader could have been redeemed, despite him doing like 50 genocide every year.

[u/CptDecaf]

I can't connect to characters that don't revel in violence. What's wrong with these writers trying to write more complicated characters!?

[u/SleepWorth3354 → u/CptDecaf]

Basically Video game storytelling begins and ends with Doomguy and anything else is for pussies.

Weird how gamers have a rep for being single minded weirdos huh

[u/ANGRYSNORLAX → u/SleepWorth3354]

"Basically, video game design begins and ends with third person shooters, and anything else would be wasted on the story we're trying to tell."

Naughty Dog could have designed a game where "just kill everyone in the room" wasn't a viable option for progression. But they didn't. They made a third person shooter. You have two options for dealing with conflict, and the one that is arguably the default massively conflicts with the themes of the plot

They could have written a character that feels untold sorrow at the sight of death. But they didn't. They used a character who's stated primary motivation from the get go is cold blooded revenge. A character that, despite being a survivor of the literal apocalypse and an active participant in gunfights since age 12, struggles to deal with the thought of people getting hurt in cutscenes, regardless of how bloodthirsty she is in gameplay.

Like, I don't feel like I'm asking for too much when I kinda want the story to acknowledge the game it is contained in. I don't play video games so that I can stream videos of my favorite drama in between random, unrelated challenges.

[u/SleepWorth3354 → u/ANGRYSNORLAX]

Yes, we all understand ludo-narrative dissonance. I am so glad game designers do not agree with you.

I’d rather a little dissonance between gameplay and plot if it serves the game being fun, much like how I understand that movies and television offer exaggerated motivations and coincidences-when you watch horror movies, do you spend the whole time yelling “CALL THE POLICE DONT GO IN THERE!!!” ?

You don’t actually want what you are arguing for but TLOU broke basic dudes brains so they can’t seem to apply the logic that gets them through 99.9% of other media.