Fate/stay night Game discussion (Warning: Spoilers)

[Moczo]

Personally? I took a month off between each route. I had no desire to read UBW right after I finished Fate, and no desire to read HF right after I finished UBW. Better to take a break and come at it with a fresh perspective. Nasu's writing style is kind of wearying to me... I mean, when I write stuff I'm too wordy, I know that, but I have nothing on that guy. He's like, 'never say in one word what you can say in thirty'. If I didn't take a break between each route I'd have driven myself insane.

Originally Posted by DragoZERO

I bet other people would condemn Shirou for choosing the world over his love. I guess it's just view point.

And some people in-game do if you try to make him do that, as I recall. It's hard to say for sure what is the right choice, which is the entire point. Until the person you love most in the world has a knife to his/her throat, you can't possibly know for sure what you'll sacrifice to protect them, and that includes what parts of yourself and your ideals you'd abandon.

[Flinch]

Originally Posted by DragoZERO

I bet other people would condemn Shirou for choosing the world over his love. I guess it's just view point.

That's because they are selfish and put what they want before the needs of the masses.

[BladeEntity]

Thats odd I took 34 hours to finish all 3 routes without skipping I think I took a week to do it...

[Moczo]

Originally Posted by Flinch

That's because they are selfish and put what they want before the needs of the masses.

Yup. But lots of people will do exactly that, it's just human nature. It's easier for us to empathize with human suffering if it's wearing a face we know and love. I mean, how many fictional characters have been willing to put thousands or even millions of people in danger because a villain kidnapped their spouse or child? It's selfish, yes, but people are selfish creatures and while exceptional individuals can always put the needs of the many over the needs of the few, a lot of us simply naturally put a greater value on our loved ones than on people we've never met. And unfortunately, the only way to know for sure what you'd do in Shirou's situation is to actually go through something like that and make that choice.

Personally? I don't know what I would do.

[DragoZERO]

Originally Posted by Moczo

Personally? I took a month off between each route. I had no desire to read UBW right after I finished Fate, and no desire to read HF right after I finished UBW. Better to take a break and come at it with a fresh perspective. Nasu's writing style is kind of wearying to me... I mean, when I write stuff I'm too wordy, I know that, but I have nothing on that guy. He's like, 'never say in one word what you can say in thirty'. If I didn't take a break between each route I'd have driven myself insane.

I thought about taking a long break, but if I did I'd be less likely to go back to it. So I took a few days break and got to it. Also, I didn't want to forget too much about Fate so that I could compare them all.

But this was definitely wordy. It definitely could have been trimmed down. I actually fell asleep a few times, but the BGM and SFX also contributed to it (the ticking clock especially).

And some people in-game do if you try to make him do that, as I recall. It's hard to say for sure what is the right choice, which is the entire point. Until the person you love most in the world has a knife to his/her throat, you can't possibly know for sure what you'll sacrifice to protect them, and that includes what parts of yourself and your ideals you'd abandon.

Yes. It was not until Heaven's Feel that Shirou had to make a choice. In the other two routes the heroines were not in danger like that, nor did they end up being an enemy. Saber & Rin both were able to take care of themselves to a certain degree, and the world doom did not impend as long in those routes either. There is also the fact that Shirou felt responsibility towards Sakura, that was a big factor in his decision.

[RadiantBeam]

Originally Posted by Moczo

Personally? I took a month off between each route. I had no desire to read UBW right after I finished Fate, and no desire to read HF right after I finished UBW. Better to take a break and come at it with a fresh perspective. Nasu's writing style is kind of wearying to me... I mean, when I write stuff I'm too wordy, I know that, but I have nothing on that guy. He's like, 'never say in one word what you can say in thirty'. If I didn't take a break between each route I'd have driven myself insane.

Now that I'm thinking about it, that might be why I'm having such a hard time now playing through Heaven's Feel; almost the minute I finished playing Fate, I went back and started on Unlimited Blade Works. I might have burned myself out and never realized it.

[Cherry_Lover]

Originally Posted by Flinch

Let's ask you this. Say you are strongly against taking the life of another to such an extent that you will never kill. It is so strong, that it is woven into your morality, so you therefore believe with everything you are that it is wrong to kill. If you were to abandon that ideal, you would be abandoning who you are.

Perhaps, yes. But Shirou never abandoned his ideal, at least not at that point.

Shiro believed that he could truly save everyone and become a hero of justice, and just up and abandons the ideal without any deliberation, which NO ONE is able to do if they have a strong sense of morality. That is one thing that I despise about that path.

No, he didn't. Think about what you're saying for a moment. Shirou belived that he could truly save everyone, and yet you're claiming that it was in-character for him to abandon Sakura even though she had yet to hurt anyone (to his knowledge, anyway), and was entirely blameless for the situation.

The reason Shirou protected Sakura was precisely because he wanted to save everyone, not in spite of it.

Originally Posted by Flinch

In all honesty, that situation could be broken down easily. Here's a plague, its infected someone you care deeply for, now you have two choices. Destroy it and the person you care about, or save it and run the risk of causing thousands to die.

You take a third option. You isolate them and attempt to treat them. Shirou had no idea that that option wouldn't work at the point when he made that decision.

Humans with a weak will will believe that everything will be okay if they save the life, which won't ever happen. The only realistic and practical thing to do would be to destroy them both. Chalk up an ideal that demands saving thousands over one person, it's not even worth considering what the proper action would be.

No, sacrificing an innocent person 'just in case' is not the right thing to do, espcially when that innocent person has suffered so much in their life. Sakura deserves a chance to live a proper life, and it's unfair to judge Shirou just because he's not willing to take that away from her and destroy her heart.

THAT is the primary reason why I don't like HF, and I also don't like Worm-chan at all, either.

So you don't like the fact that Sakura actually gets a break for once, and gets a chance in life, rather than being thoroughly fucked over by her 'loving' sister like in UBW?

Originally Posted by Flinch

That's because they are selfish and put what they want before the needs of the masses.

Or, perhaps, we're not selfish but simply recognise that the idea of killing the weak to save the strong is a very dangerous one, and has led to pretty many of the worst attrocities ever committed.

Also, it's impossible to care about everyone equally. The human mind can't cope with it. So, you either care about those close to you and protect them, which allows you to be a normal human, with normal human emotions, which allows you to also go out and enjoy help others, or you destroy your humanity by attempting to treat everyone equally and end up broken and jaded like Kiritsugu and Archer did, killing many innocent people 'just in case'.

Originally Posted by DragoZERO

Yes. It was not until Heaven's Feel that Shirou had to make a choice. In the other two routes the heroines were not in danger like that, nor did they end up being an enemy. Saber & Rin both were able to take care of themselves to a certain degree, and the world doom did not impend as long in those routes either. There is also the fact that Shirou felt responsibility towards Sakura, that was a big factor in his decision.

Yeah, exactly. Shirou in the first two routes never had to choose between his true wish (to protect everyone, especially the people he loved) and the ideal he'd borrowed from his father (and which his father had been utterly broken by and had desperately tried to avoid Shirou taking up), which was to kill a few to save many.

Not only that, but as sympthetic characters go, Sakura is pretty near the top of the list. Anyone who, after hearing her backstory, could condemn her to death on the basis that she might go insane has no heart at all, and someone like that wouldn't want to protect innocent people in the first place.

[Flinch]

Let me get this straight; is keeping someone alive to treat them not the same as keeping them alive?

my second point is exactly the same as your third point in the fact that both are alive, running an enormous risk.

If someone is infected with smallpox, they are killed as soon as they are found and their bodies are incinerated. Why? Because no human has any antibodies for smallpox anymore, and it could cause a pandemic. Would you try and save that person, only to run the risk of exposing others, who would then expose more and cause a pandemic, or would you guarantee the lives of millions, if not billions by killing them?

[Arbitres]

Sorry for the confusion.

It's quite all right. Now then...

Spoiler for On HF:

You can't possibly know for sure what you'll sacrifice to protect them, and that includes what parts of yourself and your ideals you'd abandon.

Ideals are like people, they can be killed. Choosing between the individual and the many... Quite a puppet show.

In all honesty, that situation could be broken down easily. Here's a plague, its infected someone you care deeply for, now you have two choices. Destroy it and the person you care about, or save it and run the risk of causing thousands to die.

At least with sorrow is what I say for the first option. At least be humane is what I say for the second.

Or, perhaps, we're not selfish but simply recognise that the idea of killing the weak to save the strong is a very dangerous one, and has led to pretty many of the worst attrocities ever committed.

Or kill the one to save the many. I see no problem with killing one single person who is important to you, to save thousands. Because those thousands just so happen to be like you; and that'd be a much larger tragedy then simply you being the only one sad. The world is in need of much love, I won't deprive it of something it desperately needs.

Regardless of how much you love someone. They don't equate to a hundred or even a thousand.

my second point is exactly the same as your third point in the fact that both are alive, running an enormous risk.

Looks like Flinch beat me to it. Oh well.

[Flinch]

Thank you, Arbitres

[Cherry_Lover]

Originally Posted by Flinch

Let me get this straight; is keeping someone alive to treat them not the same as keeping them alive?

Yes, but keeping them alive in a manner that reduces the chance of further casualties.

If someone is infected with smallpox, they are killed as soon as they are found and their bodies are incinerated. Why? Because no human has any antibodies for smallpox anymore, and it could cause a pandemic. Would you try and save that person, only to run the risk of exposing others, who would then expose more and cause a pandemic, or would you guarantee the lives of millions, if not billions by killing them?

Bollocks.

If someone is infected with a disease, they're put into quarantine until they either die or get better, especially one like smallpox which isn't always fatal (note that the only places where smallpox is handled have extreme precautions to guard against infection of the scientists involved and to prevent the possibility of transmission and likely have isolation wards for that purpose). To murder the person in cold blood 'just in case' would rightly be seen as the wrong thing to do, and any government who implemented such a policy would be sued to hell. Plus, it would encourage people to hide their symptoms, which would be way worse than just letting them live and trying your best to treat them whilst they're isolated.

You're perhaps right about the bodies, but that's another matter. Whilst they're alive, they'll get the best medical care possible, albeit in isolation so that they can't infect anyone else. Plus, it's hard to even know if someone is infected (until it's too late), and it's generally up to the people working in such places to report accidents if they think they may have infected themselves. If you made it policy to kill them if they were infected, everyone would keep quiet and you'd make things worse.

Spoiler for On HF:

Originally Posted by Arbitres

At least with sorrow is what I say for the first option. At least be humane is what I say for the second.

What are you talking about? Surely not murdering someone in cold blood is the 'humane' option, even if it's not the 'logical' option.

Or kill the one to save the many. I see no problem with killing one single person who is important to you, to save thousands. Because those thousands just so happen to be like you; and that'd be a much larger tragedy then simply you being the only one sad. The world is in need of much love, I won't deprive it of something it desperately needs.

Don't sugar coat it. It is a case of killing the 'weak' to save the 'strong' (although I don't mean that Sakura is mentally weak, merely that she's unable to protect herself). And the problem is that that philosophy allows for the killing of many innocent people 'just in case'. After all, you never know when someone might go on a killing spree. And, in my view, the world would be a much better place if we lined up the executives of every big business (especially investment banks...) up against a wall and shot the lot of them. Yeah' we'd lose a few good people, but we'd also lose a lot of bad ones. So it's worth it, right? They've certainly killed people, albeit indirectly, with their policies destroying the economy of the world to make themselves richer.

Regardless of how much you love someone. They don't equate to a hundred or even a thousand.

But to his knowledge Sakura hadn't done anything yet. Allowing people to be punished for what they might do is the foundation of virtually all authoritarianism and moralistic restrictions on freedom of speech, because it's easy to say "well, this person might become a terrorist, lock him up in Guantanemo Bay" or "well, this person likes Ilya, so they might end up abusing children, better lock him up just in case".

[Flinch]

Guantanamo doesn't officially have political prisoners, genius.

Additionally, smallpox is no longer a disease, but a BWMD, as NO ONE has any resistance to it. The vaccine cured it, then the disease all but died out, and is primarily produced from samples in labs as a biological weapon. if there was a smallpox outbreak, there'd be deaths in the millions, if hundreds of millions. if you try and treat them, there'd be a mass of outbreaks because there'd be too many to properly quarantine without killing them. The most logical thing do do would be to drop a low-yield thermonuclear weapon over the quarantine zone and completely eradicate the disease if it were getting out of hand, which it can do with absurd ease.

As much as you prepare for something, someone, somewhere, gets scared and messes up.


Oh, the best care you can give is probably 10cc of morpha at regular intervals, keep them out of pain before they die, or just give them a fatal amount to end it faster.

[Arbitres]

Spoiler for On HF:

What are you talking about? Surely not murdering someone in cold blood is the 'humane' option, even if it's not the 'logical' option.

Quite ambiguous, I do realize. But it's in my line of ideology. I could go into my depth of hypocrisy, but I'd rather not.

Don't sugar coat it. It is a case of killing the 'weak' to save the 'strong' (although I don't mean that Sakura is mentally weak, merely that she's unable to protect herself). And the problem is that that philosophy allows for the killing of many innocent people 'just in case'. After all, you never know when someone might go on a killing spree. And, in my view, the world would be a much better place if we lined up the executives of every big business (especially investment banks...) up against a wall and shot the lot of them. Yeah' we'd lose a few good people, but we'd also lose a lot of bad ones. So it's worth it, right? They've certainly killed people, albeit indirectly, with their policies destroying the economy of the world to make themselves richer.

Thinking I sugarcoat anything is a misdeed. Besides, we both know it wouldn't work like that. If Sakura only targeted the evils of the world, I'd have utterly no problem with her doing it. But she was liable to kill anything and anyone.

I acknowledge your ideology, despite the travesties we face in differing opinion on what may be 'humane' or what may be 'right' or 'wrong'... Oh well.

[Altima of the Gates]

Guys. This conversation can be ended with one thing DragoZERO said:

I bet other people would condemn Shirou for choosing the world over his love. I guess it's just view point.

Its really all just your world view. This conversation isn't worth getting into because it goes into a person's fundamental beliefs. We could talk logic here, but this isn't even a logical opinion anymore. We're pretty much just going back and forth with no side giving ground. Its kinda pointless.

[DragoZERO]

So, dropping this endless topic...

Did anyone else dislike Gilgamesh's design in UBW & HF? They could have at least given him alternate armor to put on instead of staying in those clothes.

And, what was the deal with Rin's friend who was the captain of the archery club (forget her name). Shinji did kidnap her, right? I don't remember what happened after they said she disappeared.

[Flinch]

Idealogical thought vs practical thought

that's what this has come down to, which is a focal deciding point through most of the game.

[Flinch]

Originally Posted by DragoZERO

And, what was the deal with Rin's friend who was the captain of the archery club (forget her name). Shinji did kidnap her, right? I don't remember what happened after they said she disappeared.

Mitsuzuri, if I'm not spelling that wrong

[Arbitres]

Did anyone else dislike Gilgamesh's design in UBW & HF? They could have at least given him alternate armor to put on instead of staying in those clothes.

Gilgamesh's armor is preferable. I can't imagine the King of mighty Uruk in anything but. Of course, a King is more liable to wear satin than armor.

Idealogical thought vs practical thought

that's what this has come down to, which is a focal deciding point through most of the game.

So I'm aware. I suppose it's all ideal-based.

And, what was the deal with Rin's friend who was the captain of the archery club (forget her name). Shinji did kidnap her, right? I don't remember what happened after they said she disappeared.

This is Shinji we're talking about.

[Cherry_Lover]

Originally Posted by Flinch

Guantanamo doesn't officially have political prisoners, genius.

Yeah, and nor does Cuba, or Iran, or North Korea (probably). They all have people who are imprisoned for 'treason' or 'subversion' or 'insurgancy'.

Additionally, smallpox is no longer a disease, but a BWMD, as NO ONE has any resistance to it. The vaccine cured it, then the disease all but died out, and is primarily produced from samples in labs as a biological weapon.

Well, yes, smallpox no longer exists as a disease, but it's also not a biological weapon, at least not officially. I doubt there are any policies for dealing with it, at least not any that you're privy to.

if there was a smallpox outbreak, there'd be deaths in the millions, if hundreds of millions.

Perhaps. Personally, I'm not so sure.

if you try and treat them, there'd be a mass of outbreaks because there'd be too many to properly quarantine without killing them.

Well, in all honesty that will happen no matter what you do. Diseases aren't that easy to contain, especially when people move around, and a policy of leaving them to die (or even actively murdering them) would lead to panic amongst the people in the infected area.

The most logical thing do do would be to drop a low-yield thermonuclear weapon over the quarantine zone and completely eradicate the disease if it were getting out of hand, which it can do with absurd ease.

It wouldn't work, because people would escape. Particularly since the guards wouldn't sit there and just die. You might get away with it once, but you would be hated forever.

But, anyway, it's still wrong to sacrifce people 'just in case'. Maybe there are some circumstances where it would be justified, but given what Shirou knows in HF (at that time), it's not.

As much as you prepare for something, someone, somewhere, gets scared and messes up.

Yeah, and that will apply equally if you try just nuking the whole lot. Someone has to actually do it, after all, and it wouldn't be popular, not least amongst people who had friends or relatives in the quarantine area.

Oh, the best care you can give is probably 10cc of morpha at regular intervals, keep them out of pain before they die, or just give them a fatal amount to end it faster.

I doubt that's actually true. It's possible to survive almost any disease with proper care and a little luck, even something as nasty as Ebola.

Originally Posted by Flinch

Idealogical thought vs practical thought

that's what this has come down to, which is a focal deciding point through most of the game.

Yeah, although it's somewhat ironic that the original argument is that Shirou went against his ideal when he killed Sakura, whereas what he actually did was go against the practical implementation of that ideal that his father followed (which, by the way, isn't very practical when you take account of human nature...).

Note that, if Shirou kills Sakura at that point, he then has to take on Rin, Ilya, Gil and (probably) Zouken without a servant. However, saving her means he has Ilya and Rin as potential allies. So, even from the 'practical' viewpoint it's arguable that saving Sakura was the better option.

[Flinch]

There is no cure for smallpox... the best you can do is make them comfortable while they die