Indeed your question is valid, and would be helpful to potential buyers, and yes the thread devolved into " I am german" "my suffering is more than your suffering" and other nonsense. I would like to know whether it is possible to save yourself by sacrificing others, just like in Papers Please, as a immigration officer you can condemn others to death in order to meet your quota so you can earn enough money so your family has enough to pay for heating so they do not die of Pneumonia. Yes, I have nothing against you illegal alien, but my family needs bread.
I want hard choices, I want a good nuanced look at what drove normal people to do bad things, not your usual Hollywood morality of laughable caricatures of EVIIIIILLL NOTSEEES. I want the player to be able to see how difficult circumstances can drive decent men to do evil, and therefore having the option, the choice to be a turn coat, stool pigeon or informant would be an interesting, morally difficult and therefore good gaming choice. After all, good gaming is a series of consequential, interesting decisions. Maybe I work with the counter insurgency authorities and actually betray a few commies to them, and make them trust me, and then use that trust to set them up for the ultimate betrayal of them to win a victory for the insurgency? All according to plan? These are good decision loops.
Those would all be "good" difficult choices and would make the game more nuanced, I think. Yet the "awakened" on the board seem to have low rated it(thankfully they cannot complain much about us being "evil" for wanting such gaming choices as on other forums) and all my comments on such....even the ones where I simply asked if such choices were or could be a thing.....because to the "awakened" I am evil for wanting to play evil in THIS sort of game, yet they can play GTA series and beat up street walkers or kill intelligent aliens in games for fun and that's seemingly ok.
And it seems the answer is no, you can't, you have to goody two shoes all the way, which is a disappointment. And the group you lead seems set up for infighting and backstabbing. Bolsheviks and the religious and patriots and the Jews? Why can't I betray the say Bolsheviks by working out a deal with the authorities?
It's because this game is likely propaganda made for a "certain group" to push their views and give them something to play.....and then GOG(the company, not the mods, who are just doing their jobs) sells it while saying politics are to be kept off the boards.
The fact that I asked how much woke stuff was in the game, wanting to avoid a Wokenstein nonsense and got downvoted tells me that yes, this is woke to the core, and I will sit this out.
Not just the game but a large enough portion of the userbase here, it would seem.
Also c'mon, the title "Darkest of Times"(as if nothing was ever worse in all of history), the styling of the characters, the game card with the soldiers/dog and the scared people, etc should've tipped people off from the minute it launched.
I can't believe your articulate, nuanced comment was low-rated. I myself lost 10 rating points in the course of the day, surely from this topic alone, even though all I did was try to get the topic back on track (and I am a slouch compared to GameRager's constantly getting downvoted for no good reason).
They got low rated due to wanting what some on the board/in life think is evil/wrong....the ability to do harm to/betray/etc a certain group of "fictional"(in the case of this game, that is) characters....which for some reason seem to be a no no to do anything bad against in ANY sort of media(a taboo, if you will).
Yet,(as I said to that user) one can beat up street walkers in GTA, kill innocents in other games, etc and none of the same people seem to bat an eye or complain much.
The fact they feel the need to defend pixels on screens/in this game while actual problems occur in the world makes me shake my head and sigh.
(And yeah, it's due to the topic here....as even though I get low rated on a ton of posts they seem to hit "certain ones" more than others...like when I say anything even a bit un-pc. The posts I and others made here getting buried seems to enforce this idea)
Anyway, great comment. You are right on about gaming being better when there are consequential decisions to be made, and "gray morality" (or whatever term people prefer) adds to this. While some buyers prefer linear games, I have to say it seems evident to me that the more paths available to play in a game, the better. Some players might only play the one path; other players might try all paths available. But it adds to the depth and longevity of the game regardless.