>capturing/imprisoning enemies is portrayed as morally superior

File: 1394461491713.jpg (73KB, 524x468px) Image search: [Google]

73KB, 524x468px

>Game gives you the option to non-lethally take down enemies
>There is literally no benefit to doing so because lethal is easier and nothing else in the game changes save for you getting maybe a mild slap on the wrist for being naughty

>>386637139
Killing someone when you can capture them is completely and utterly pointless unless you are desperate for that emotional high. If you capture them you can do a variety of fun things to them and maybe even make a friend. So yes, it is superior.

>>386637139
That would be correct.

File: Zero_Wolf.jpg (90KB, 270x407px) Image search: [Google]

90KB, 270x407px

>>386637636
Didn't worked to well for this guy.
Apocalypto game when btw

File: 1491394860975.png (98KB, 288x277px) Image search: [Google]

98KB, 288x277px

>massacre thousands of goons
>reach the final boss
>"if you kill him, you will be just like him"

>>386637380
I don't mind this because I can make a neat little challenge run out of non-lethal only playthroughs. But I also hate games that have a ton of cool weapons, punish you for using those weapons on enemies because "lol killing is badong".

>>386637139
>Just finished the Injustice 2 story.

If Batman says killing is wrong, then killing is wrong. Just don't do it, bro.

>>386638340
This has a pompous sounding name but it's a valid criticism.

>>386638340
i haven't seen this for a long time, thank god

>>386637139
>Peace Walker/MGSV
>use the scanner to check each guard
>if they're a B rank shitter they get a bullet in the back of the head
>A rank or better they're shipped off to be beaten into submission on Mother Base