Installa Steam
Accedi
|
Lingua
简体中文 (cinese semplificato)
繁體中文 (cinese tradizionale)
日本語 (giapponese)
한국어 (coreano)
ไทย (tailandese)
Български (bulgaro)
Čeština (ceco)
Dansk (danese)
Deutsch (tedesco)
English (inglese)
Español - España (spagnolo - Spagna)
Español - Latinoamérica (spagnolo dell'America Latina)
Ελληνικά (greco)
Français (francese)
Indonesiano
Magyar (ungherese)
Nederlands (olandese)
Norsk (norvegese)
Polski (polacco)
Português (portoghese - Portogallo)
Português - Brasil (portoghese brasiliano)
Română (rumeno)
Русский (russo)
Suomi (finlandese)
Svenska (svedese)
Türkçe (turco)
Tiếng Việt (vietnamita)
Українська (ucraino)
Segnala un problema nella traduzione
Regole e linee guida per le discussioni
Segnala questo messaggio
Keep doing the same thing, you get the same result.
You keep Ra's alive, he will keep killing. He will kill anyone in his way, especially traitors.
Said the same thing
"Well, Batman would have given Joker the cure in Arkham City, so the same logic should be applied here".
It would seem that way, BUT in Arkham Knight it's heavily hinted that Batman was going to let him die. He only said he was going to save him, because he didn't want to admit that the Joker had won and pushed him over the edge.
Source: https://youtu.be/1UxzfByJ3iw?t=710 (skip to 11:50)
Also, I would like to argument that the whole game is about the death of Batman. However, it's not a literal death of him, but the death of the myth of Batman.
Batman has been fighting crime for too long - criminals no longer fear him as much, his number of Nemeses keeps increasing and the stakes just keep getting higher and higher. His legend is not as powerful as it used to be.
He realizes his myth, his morals and his rules are no longer enough to defend Gotham, not with an organized army with a personal vendetta against him. Letting Ra's die is one of the moments, that contributes to the death of Batman - he knows that Ra's death will save Gotham the League of Assassins, but he realizes that he is breaking what Batman stands for. His myth was once the guardian of Gotham, but now it is because of him that Gotham is in danger.
"Well, Batman would have given Joker the cure in Arkham City, so the same logic should be applied here".
It would seem that way, BUT in Arkham Knight it's heavily hinted that Batman was going to let him die. He only said he was going to save him, because he didn't want to admit that the Joker had won and pushed him over the edge.
Source: https://youtu.be/1UxzfByJ3iw?t=710 (skip to 11:50)
Also, I would like to argument that the whole game is about the death of Batman. However, it's not a literal death of him, but the death of the myth of Batman.
Batman has been fighting crime for too long - criminals no longer fear him as much, his number of Nemeses keeps increasing and the stakes just keep getting higher and higher. His legend is not as powerful as it used to be. He realizes his myth, his morals and his rules are no longer enough to defend Gotham from the criminals, who grow bolder and more hateful of him. "As his world grew darker, so did ours. When his life ended, ours could begin anew".
Letting Ra's die is one of the moments, that contributes to the death of Batman - he knows that Ra's death will save Gotham from the League of Assassins, but he realizes that he is breaking what Batman stands for. He himself is putting a nail in the coffin of Batman.
"Honesty IS the best policy."
"Proud of you"
before dying really made me question my decision. They really got me up good. What an exceptionally well-written conflict for a Batman story.
I must disagree with one thing repeated many times in this thread. Destroying life support device is not simply "not helping". It's not like Ra's is brain dead at the moment, he is councious and therefore actively destroying his life support machine is in fact much closer to the act of killing rather than not helping. Not helping option would be not giving him the medicine neither destroying the machine. Unfortunately it's impossible to choose that combination.
And yet when you destroy his machine, Ra actually thanks Batman. Even if you would leave him to die, he would still die.Destroying the machine would even be merciful. Not saving him is not the same as killing him.
Btw even Ra's al Ghul himself says "Proud about you" to Batman after you put him into the storage of your nasty pets zoo. Also he not is dying. So no one knows when he dies. You just put an old man from what you have taken the immortality into the prison.
If you give him the cure you create a monster and the dead of Ra's daughter is passively your fault.
Ghul already wanted to end himself in City and let Batman take over. He himself does not want to continue.
That's not quite how it works though. If a doctor saves a murderer the doctor is still not responsible for the murders.
But I think people these games bit too seriously, if the police were even normally competent then none of the supervillians would even escape. In reality there would be no need for a Batman.
Besides, who would care about a Batman when there is superman?
well, yes and no. FIRST OFF: a doctor's job is to save a life, no matter what. BATMAN'S job is to prevent criminals to do their thing, so he is miserably failing at his job every time scarecrow sets off something like the diner at the beginning of the game.
SECOND: it's not a matter of taking things too seriously, it's about pointing out crappy writing.
if we were still back in the day, when every time a villain escaped they robbed a bank or injuried someone or, hell, killed a couple of people at most. yeah, batman would have all the right in the world to say "i don't kill". but when you start with the stuff portrayed in these games, having hundreds of deaths because of ONE guy...no. just no. by this time, the entire nation should have passed a law stating that the death row would be issued for those ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥.
you also need to keep in mind that batman is not the same as he once was. he is FAR MORE RICH NOW. he could easily fix a lot of problems by just creating more jobs, removing people from the streets and cutting down the number of thugs the supervillains would have (i seriously doubt that common thugs would prefer being hospitalized every 3-4 months rather than having a simple but honest job).
Yes, every life is important and yes, batman shouldn't go around being the punisher but for christ's sake, he can't keep lecturing people from his million dollar moral high ground.
the time have changed and the writers have gotten worse. nowadays batman is becoming a joke. anyone with a lick of sense would see that there is no saving the joker, the riddler or the mad hatter. those people are crazy, will never be cured and are only a danger to society, so they should be permanently removed.
what's worse is that the real reason for batman's "rule" isn't morality. it's so that the writers don't have to come up with a new villain every week. which is sad