Discussion VideoGame / Prototype2

I would, but they explain it (though IMO poorly at best) in The Anchor. So sadly, no, not quite. It's just not adequately explained. More All There in the Manual.

Why not in YMMV, then? It may not be a true YMMV trope (by its indexing), but there are a lot of people who don't think it was enough of a reason for the complete 180. Because character derailment—near as I can tell, anyway—may or may not be explained by the creator. Doesn't mean it's not derailment.

Believe me, I do think it was Character Derailment. But I don't know how to make a YMMV page.

P2 already has a YMMV page, though...

Or do you mean converting the trope to YMMV?

Huh. So it does. Sorry, didn't see it there.

So I guess it goes back to "to add or not to add, that is the question."

I think not to add, but adding Character Derailment to YMMV. That's just me though. They do DEVELOP it. Just poorly.

Guys. Read the Character Derailment page. Its got this nice, big, bold note at the top. Hard to miss.

I would definitely vote for Not as You Know Them. I'm not particularly cynical, but I wouldn't put it past Radical to derail one character to make another look better. They try and justify it with the comics, which makes it sting less than out and out character assassination, but I think it counts nonetheless. Certainly as a YMMV trope.

edit: The reason I wouldn't put it past them is because it's a videogame based on maximum catharsis, plot secondary. They probably figure, and I would agree with them, that the powers and gameplay matter more than how they treat the characters. Thus, less aversion to Character Derailment. QED.

That's my opinion, anyway.

Not as You Know Them fits best, I think.

I agree. Not as You Know Them fits Mercer. He changes from a conflicted Anti-Hero in Prototype to a all out villain in Prototype 2. It's a complete reversal of his character.

I agree with what you've written, but I foresee problems with it being accepted, as the trope would be a very harsh reflection of Mercer's intelligence, and people who like Mercer would yada yada, etc.

I say put it in, see what happens.

Well, either that or putting it in [PROTOTYPE 2]. The other problem I had was that when you consider that, even without the original's intelligence, he still consumed a sizable amount of people. If one would go by the Web of Intrigue alone (which is not everyone by far), he took in about forty-six people with doctorates at a minimum, and took in many more civilians. Enough to gain a conscience bit by bit, and probably enough to realize just how wrong his viewpoint is if he just took a look at his accumulated memories.

So in summary, I'm not sure if this goes in Headscratchers, YMMV, or both or neither.

Mercer's also eaten hundreds of Blackwatch soldiers, including Randall himself.

Its up in the air if Mercer is even vaguely sane let alone reasonable. The ending to the first game has him outright say that he's got the minds of thousands of of men screaming in his head. I'm honestly convinced that between the fact that he isn't human and that he's been munching on Blackwatch and Gentek scientists, the largest collection of insanity and sociopathy, Mercer's mind is pretty much a twisted mess of inhuman insanity.

It's outright stated, yes, but it is also heavily implied that those minds gave him his conscience. For all the crazed ramblings, there's also the fact that he is more empathetic with hundreds of minds than the original Dr. Alex J. Mercer was with one mind. Well, until the sequel of course.

Still, if he isn't reasonable or sane, as you say, does that make Insane Troll Logic less viable? It's right there in the name.

By its nature, Insane Troll Logic is completely nonsensical logic. Its not simply a mistake in judgment or a fallacious conclusion, this is logic that is completely, blatantly insane. If Mercer had reasons for doing what he did that make even a vague amount of sense, then he simply suffers from reaching a mistaken conclusion, not Insane Troll Logic.

So, in that case, it is not Insane Troll Logic, but would it be acceptable in Headscratchers? I do not know the protocol for Headscratchers. I normally use main pages.

Headscratchers would work. The only real protocol for Fridge Logic entries on Headscratchers is that you shouldn't use it to whine or complain. (if you need to whine about a work, there's the Review section)

Alright, that's up. I hope it doesn't seem like whining. I tried to make a distinct reason for each of the issues.

I know Insane Troll Logic is a step above (below?) simple fallacies or mistakes, but Mercer seems to be making one in each step of his thought process. Does that count?

I'm not sure. Zaptech, what do you think about that part?

Again, flawed logic doesn't count as insane troll logic. ITL is "Restauraunt worker, therefore cheese. Cheese, therefore three. Three, therefore COMMUNIST." Its logic so insane that its virtually a parody of fallacious logic, and it says it right there on the description of the trope.

Okay, then no is no. Thanks for the help.

I'll be agreeing with Zaptech here. Flawed logic can also come from a mistake in judgment or analysis. Like most of Freud's views and incorrect conclusions taken from studies.

Bad idea, at this point. Look how much work is on this page already; trying to merge this with another page, which is already very large, is a recipe for disaster.

Is there a point to this?

Edit: Wait, how'd you get that info a month before the game came out?

There were previews showing off the beginning of the game, including the scene he was talking about.