[CASE 1 SPOILER] What is the Decision at the End of Case 1 for?

[1410c]

There's one thing that really unnerves me and I'd really love your opinions on it:

At the End of Case 1 I can decide if Lord Marsh goes to Prison or if he's allowed to die at home. Then the Game goes ahead and:
Choice A) You shoot him dead on the spot
Choice B) You shoot the man dead whom you've JUST THE VERY SAME MOMENT proved to not be the evil genius behind it and who is the father of your client
Choice C) You let that man kill Lord Marsh
So ... what is the choice for? Seriously? Either he dies, or he dies, or you kill someone just so your choice stays relevant but you end up being a murderer? What the ...?

Hope someone can enligthen me.

PS: Did not try if you "just" shoot Mr. Hurst somewhere or kill him, but since the Cursor was not on the hand or weapon but on Vital Organs I wouldn't do that, and a shot like that on someone that's not to blame is to me quite the same anyway.

[Peregrine]

Yeah, I kinda figured that too. I replayed the sequence thinking that the prompt was on the knife, so you could shoot the knife out of his hand, but when it got to that part, I saw that it was on Hurst's head. So the only real choice is to kill the guy, or let Hurst kill him. Not exactly your cleche hero ending.

[GreyCatz]

The option to shoot Marsh makes no sense - that's exactly what he wants, and Holmes himself just said that to Hurst a few moments earlier.

The option to shoot Hurst is the 'correct' option because Marsh must be tried in a court of law, and Hurst's vigilantilism, however much you empathize with his cause, must be anathema to Holmes's own perception of civilized society.

Then there's the third option: Do nothing. In which case Hurst slits Marsh's throat and lives to go home to his son, presumably. In that case, Holmes basically washes his hands of anything Hurst has already done, and later might do concerning other involved parties, having decided that Marsh's worldview is so reprehensible as to justify Hurst's taking the law into his own hands.

[Peregrine]

Did you happen to play through the cutscene after shooting Hurst? I'm curious, because I didn't, and I'm guessing the OP did either. The prompt is clearly on Hurst's head, which would strongly suggest to the player that you'd be shooting Hurst in the head, killing your client's dad, and making him an orphan. Which doesn't strike me as the correct option. Unless, of course, you saw something in that cutscene that we didn't, where instead of shooting him in the head, you shoot the knife out of his hand, in which case, that option would make a lot more sense, even if the prompts were misleading.

[1410c]

Just watched the specific ending on YouTube (didn't want to replay it) and A) the prompt is on Hursts Head, suggesting the lethal shooting, which to me - same as you - is a definite reason not to choose it (orphaning your client, etc) and B) he then shoots him in the heart, clearly killing him. Just wanted to clarify that to you, Peregrine! And thanks for the answers so far!