Darvond: 2) Having seen a Let's Play that features a
lot of the Privacy Invasions of 1, (and went though the story, of course), I have no idea why anyone would root or cheer for Aiden Pierce, the flattest soda of a Daduncle.
Because rreveenge. WD1 is a straightforward "Death Wish" vigilante story. Baddie stepped on your toe, you're entitled to slaughter the city for great justice. It has that fun b-movie flavor. With some sort of brooding antihero you indeed can or cannot root for, and aren't entirely asked to.
It's WD2 that goes with the hackers-against-the-system angle, with a gang of young cool super preachy activists hacking into everyone's mailboxes and back accounts while protesting that, if unckecked, big corps will end up hacking into everyone's mailboxes and bank accounts. The plot and gameplay seriously revolves around gaining followers for that crusade by publicizing how cool your actions are and denouncing how big tech threatens to, basically, treat people the same way you do. It's... not immensely well thought out. At least WD3 pits you against an authoritarian, xenophobic and racist (but also, because randomizer, racially super diverse) londonian dictatorship. It makes... marginally more sense ?
Still, narrative quirks aside, these games are all absolutely awesome.
Also GOG sells a game, which name I don't remember, and which I haven't played, where, according to the description, you're supposed to play as a gang of modern day robin hoods, robbing museums for profit and giving that profit to the poor. Except that, duh, museums are precisely public, democratic institutions bringing art contemplation within reach of everyone, as opposed to private owners and art traffickers who just keep it in their own living rooms. Great job, justice warriors.
All in all, pure baddies who know what they are doing and understand the stakes are less irritating to play.