[SPOILERS] - Hurting a Certain Animal

[loveless]

I know this has been discussed in the forums before, but I don't want to necro a two-year old topic.

Chapter 3 - Chaos Theory. Did you throw the bone to the road or to the parking lot?

I threw the bone towards the road. It's the more logical choice, considering the dog may come back to literally bite you. It also makes Frank more vulnerable. Last, I wanted to be cruel towards Frank after all the ♥♥♥♥ he's caused selling drugs.

I was quite surprised when I found out that only 6% of people threw the bone towards to the road, but more than 50% tried to shoot Frank. It seems as if people have grown impassive towards people dying in video games compared to a dog merely getting hurt.

[charly4711]

Yeah, I see your point. I did throw the bone to the road, because (a) I wanted to get the dog as far away from me as possible, and (b) because I didn't think it actually meant _onto_ the road or _across_ the road. But then I rewound time ... or did I throw towards the lot on subsequent playthroughs? Don't remember exactly.

[Dethlane]

Originally posted by poetryofthedreams:

Chapter 3 - Chaos Theory. Did you throw the bone to the road or to the parking lot?

To the parking lot. Pompidou is merely defending his territory, no reason to actually hurt him. Yet.

Originally posted by poetryofthedreams:

I was quite surprised when I found out that only 6% of people threw the bone towards to the road, but more than 50% tried to shoot Frank. It seems as if people have grown impassive towards people dying in video games compared to a dog merely getting hurt.

You realize it's completely different situation, right? Back in the junkyard Frank was threatening Chloe with a knife, almost for no reason. More than enough reason to shoot him (or not, since no bullets left). Besides, shooting someone doesn't mean they die, and Pompidou dies later if he went to the road and got hurt.

[Firewalk]

Originally posted by Dethlane:

Originally posted by poetryofthedreams:

Chapter 3 - Chaos Theory. Did you throw the bone to the road or to the parking lot?

To the parking lot. Pompidou is merely defending his territory, no reason to actually hurt him. Yet.

Originally posted by poetryofthedreams:

I was quite surprised when I found out that only 6% of people threw the bone towards to the road, but more than 50% tried to shoot Frank. It seems as if people have grown impassive towards people dying in video games compared to a dog merely getting hurt.

You realize it's completely different situation, right? Back in the junkyard Frank was threatening Chloe with a knife, almost for no reason. More than enough reason to shoot him (or not, since no bullets left). Besides, Pompidou dies later if he went to the road and got hurt.

That and there's this:

To not get Frank hurt or killed, you have to put in some effort into your dialogue choices and it's a long chain of dialogue to go over every time you fail.

With the dog, if you throw it towards the road once and you don't like what you see as a result, you can fix it really easily.

[Dethlane]

Originally posted by Firewalk:

To not get Frank hurt or killed, you have to put in some effort into your dialogue choices and it's a long chain of dialogue to go over every time you fail.

That's another situation, beach talk in ep.4. And as I recall, the majority of players settled this peacefully. More often than not when I get there I want to kill him, but I don't. For Chloe's sake. Plus, there is some good in him after all.

[Deusuum]

It really two different situations, one in the heat of a moment, another much more calculated. Also, I understand that it may sound a little bit weird, but for me in addition to never sacrifice Chloe another "never" situation is hurting Pompidou. Dog person, sorry.

[loveless]

Originally posted by Dethlane:

Originally posted by poetryofthedreams:

Chapter 3 - Chaos Theory. Did you throw the bone to the road or to the parking lot?

To the parking lot. Pompidou is merely defending his territory, no reason to actually hurt him. Yet.

Originally posted by poetryofthedreams:

I was quite surprised when I found out that only 6% of people threw the bone towards to the road, but more than 50% tried to shoot Frank. It seems as if people have grown impassive towards people dying in video games compared to a dog merely getting hurt.

You realize it's completely different situation, right? Back in the junkyard Frank was threatening Chloe with a knife, almost for no reason. More than enough reason to shoot him (or not, since no bullets left). Besides, shooting someone doesn't mean they die, and Pompidou dies later if he went to the road and got hurt.

The situation may be different but the gravity of the consequences aren't. Max shoots and potentially kills a man in the first situation. Max throws a bone and potentially kills a dog in another. Yet most players chose possibly harming a man to possibly harming a dog.

Why didn't 94% of players want the dog to get hurt? The dog acted as Frank's bodyguard (or so the game makes it out to be), was rabid and dangerous, and was a future liability. From a logical standpoint there's no reason why a player woundn't want to weaken Frank's position.

[Dethlane]

Originally posted by poetryofthedreams:

The situation may be different but the gravity of the consequences aren't. Max shoots and potentially kills a man in the first situation. Max throws a bone and potentially kills a dog in another. Yet most players chose possibly harming a man to possibly harming a dog.

First situation - Frank threatens Chloe, Max's BFF (also, as seen later, soulmate), with a knife. If Max doesn't stop him, who knows what he'll do? Thus, shooting him is totally justified. Besides, does shooting a man in the arm kill him? Or in the leg? Nope and nope.

Second situation - Chloe and Max need to get Pompidou out of their way so they can explore Frank's RV. Did Pompidou do anything bad to them earlier? Nope. Is he attacking them on his own now? Nope. Thus, why hurt him? Besides, getting hit by a car has very high possibility of lethal outcome, especially for a pet.

[loveless]

Originally posted by Dethlane:

Originally posted by poetryofthedreams:

The situation may be different but the gravity of the consequences aren't. Max shoots and potentially kills a man in the first situation. Max throws a bone and potentially kills a dog in another. Yet most players chose possibly harming a man to possibly harming a dog.

First situation - Frank threatens Chloe, Max's BFF (also, as seen later, soulmate), with a knife. If Max doesn't stop him, who knows what he'll do? Thus, shooting him is totally justified. Besides, does shooting a man in the arm kill him? Or in the leg? Nope and nope.

Second situation - Chloe and Max need to get Pompidou out of their way so they can explore Frank's RV. Did Pompidou do anything bad to them earlier? Nope. Is he attacking them on his own now? Nope. Thus, why hurt him? Besides, getting hit by a car has very high possibility of lethal outcome, especially for a pet.

You're missing my point. I never said shooting Frank was never justified or that there was a reason to hurt the dog. No matter the circumstances of both situations, the life/safety of a dog cannot be placed in the same level as that of a man.

And that's what the statistics show: more than 50% thought it was okay to hurt Frank while only 6% thought it was okay to harm the dog.

[Firewalk]

Originally posted by poetryofthedreams:

Originally posted by Dethlane:

First situation - Frank threatens Chloe, Max's BFF (also, as seen later, soulmate), with a knife. If Max doesn't stop him, who knows what he'll do? Thus, shooting him is totally justified. Besides, does shooting a man in the arm kill him? Or in the leg? Nope and nope.

Second situation - Chloe and Max need to get Pompidou out of their way so they can explore Frank's RV. Did Pompidou do anything bad to them earlier? Nope. Is he attacking them on his own now? Nope. Thus, why hurt him? Besides, getting hit by a car has very high possibility of lethal outcome, especially for a pet.

You're missing my point. I never said shooting Frank was never justified or that there was a reason to hurt the dog. No matter the circumstances of both situations, the life/safety of a dog cannot be placed in the same level as that of a man.

And that's what the statistics show: more than 50% thought it was okay to hurt Frank while only 6% thought it was okay to harm the dog.

Have you considered that many of those people also knew that even if you try to shoot him that he doesn't actually get shot? Knowing he can't get hurt kinda made it my preferred option in my playthroughs.

I mean, the game literally gives you a preview of the immediate outcome of your choice before you settle with them.

With the dog you know it's going to die, with Frank you know he won't. That's why there is such a huge discrepancy.

[Dethlane]

Originally posted by poetryofthedreams:

You're missing my point. I never said shooting Frank was never justified or that there was a reason to hurt the dog.

Then why do those statistics surprise you? I don't get it.

Originally posted by poetryofthedreams:

No matter the circumstances of both situations, the life/safety of a dog cannot be placed in the same level as that of a man.

Au contraire. Circumstances are all that matter. Someone threatens people you care about, you kick their a$$ (at least), whether it's a dog or a man or a bunch of people.

Originally posted by poetryofthedreams:

And that's what the statistics show: more than 50% thought it was okay to hurt Frank while only 6% thought it was okay to harm the dog.

Because Frank deserves it in this situation. And Pompidou in another doesn't.

[loveless]

Originally posted by Dethlane:

Originally posted by poetryofthedreams:

You're missing my point. I never said shooting Frank was never justified or that there was a reason to hurt the dog.

Then why do those statistics surprise you? I don't get it.

I've said it several times now. It surprises me that more than 50% chose to shoot Frank but only 6% chose to harm the dog. It implies that people prefer to spare a dog's life over that of a man's. With respect to the video game, that is.

[Firewalk]

Originally posted by poetryofthedreams:

Originally posted by Dethlane:

Then why do those statistics surprise you? I don't get it.

I've said it several times now. It surprises me that more than 50% chose to shoot Frank but only 6% chose to harm the dog. It implies that people prefer to spare a dog's life over that of a man's. With respect to the video game, that is.

Way to read past my last reply to you. I told you why that isn't entirely the case.

[Scooby]

From what I see, people generally care about animals more than the general public.

I think Max tries to shoot Frank for Chloe not because she hates Frank.

[loveless]

Originally posted by Firewalk:

Originally posted by poetryofthedreams:

I've said it several times now. It surprises me that more than 50% chose to shoot Frank but only 6% chose to harm the dog. It implies that people prefer to spare a dog's life over that of a man's. With respect to the video game, that is.

Way to read past my last reply to you. I told you why that isn't entirely the case.

That's because your reply does not address my point. It's not about the actual consequences, i.e. that Frank never got hurt at all. It's about the gravity of the consequences. Max/The player can't see the future. At that point in time, the player chose to potentially harm Frank. Keyword potential.

[DarkStarKnight]

Originally posted by poetryofthedreams:

I know this has been discussed in the forums before, but I don't want to necro a two-year old topic.

Chapter 3 - Chaos Theory. Did you throw the bone to the road or to the parking lot?

I threw the bone towards the road. It's the more logical choice, considering the dog may come back to literally bite you. It also makes Frank more vulnerable. Last, I wanted to be cruel towards Frank after all the♥♥♥♥♥♥he's caused selling drugs.

I was quite surprised when I found out that only 6% of people threw the bone towards to the road, but more than 50% tried to shoot Frank. It seems as if people have grown impassive towards people dying in video games compared to a dog merely getting hurt.

Here's my 2 cents

I will always choose to shoot Frank, he's threatning Chloe, it is self defence at that point

I will always choose to save a dog, and yes, I will put the dogs life over Franks, because Frank is a drug dealer who sells crack, Cocaine, and Dope to kids, I will put any animals safety above his life.