Board Thread:Questions and Answers/@comment-2804:431:B700:3599:D022:2FE7:358A:6D2-20180523202338/@comment-27713488-20180525090511

Whoring Qum used to feel like a less terrible choice than it does now. Qum's dialogue was retroactively changed a bit to make her preferences clear, as well as making it clearer that the unpleasant job she performed for that ProN was not a one-time thing. Furthermore, the financial gap between whoring and not whoring was much bigger in the past, percentage-wise, so it really felt like you could do a lot more good in the end with the money.

Later, Sierra expressed a desire to make players feel like whoring Qum was a more painful choice both morally and mechanically, as that was more in line with her initial vision. Going by some of the reactions here, she may have succeeded.

Really, though, we start killing innocents in Chapter 1 and progress to a full-scale military conquest in Chapter 3. It doesn't seem right to gloss over hundreds or thousands of innocent lives lost with the brush of long-view utilitarianism, yet consider a bit of unpleasant sex work to be a bridge too far. Especially if one can preserve some of those lives with the proceeds. If we're to be ethically consistent, the correct question really is the question posed by the original post, which is basically whether it's worth it in the end. 107.182.230.108 wrote: speaking of moral choices i think im going to go back in time to assassinate kalant. '''Please do not hijack random threads to talk about unrelated matters. Make your own, or post this somewhere relevant.'''