LAW, CHAOS, NEUTRAL. Which of these is the best one to go with? None are said to be better than the other but which one do you think is the best to follow? Please provide a reason for your choice. GalaxiaWild 21:57, July 28, 2010 (UTC)
BunkerMan says : I don't know about which is the best, but neutral is unquestionably the worst. The whole point is that law and chaos differ in whether everyone should work together for the greater good, or everyone should obtain what they have by working with their own hands. Picking neutral is being like a spoiled child, and demanding that society support you, without you ever having to put anything back into it. (kind of) Seeing as how the canon neutral endings of the games lead directly into the struggles in the next games, it's like being delusionally optimistic, and sitting in a society that's falling apart, but pretending that maintaining status quo counts as a solution, even though it clearly doesn't. What's funny is that people who play the games often remark about how law and chaos are shown to be bad choices since law is authoritarian, and chaos is insane, but they never realize that neutral people are shown to be incredibly selfish, and who expect their own hapiness to be built upon the suffering of others.
...Of course, some people are into that sort of thing. The neutral ending is basically letting consumerism rule the earth, and building a shopping mall on every street corner. Each of which contains sixty-three Starbucks, of which you're only allowed to enter if you wear tight pants.
P.S. The endings of SMTII reflect this, as well. In Law, YHVH tells you why you made the right decision (even though you kill him directly afterwards) in chaos, Lucifer belittles YHVH into silence about why what you did was the right decision. But in neutral, basically YHVH rips into you about how selfish you are, and how you believe in nothing, and how it would have been better even if you picked chaos, despite that it directly opposes him, since at least it would have meant you stood up for something. And you basically have no answer, except to kill anyone who points out your shortcomings.
You are very thorough and obviously experienced. Are you sure that's what NEUTRAL is like? Now that I think of it, all the Neutral endings involve nothing much happening. This means that the Demon ending is the Neutral ending because nothing happens. The Freedom and True Demon endings would then both be Chaotic. Are you essentially saying that CHAOS is the only one that acts as good guys?
Technically whatever ending you pick acts as good guys. What I'm saying is that whatever your ideals might or might not be, it doesn't take a genius to realize that neutrality basically means that you don't get them. Unless of course your ideals are to not have any ideals. Bunker Man 4:25, September 22, 2010 (UTC)
@Bunker Man: The ideals of Neutral are about balance. Striking a balance between Law and Chaos. Law represents Order/Authoritarianism while Chaos is about Freedom/Anarchy. Notice how the 2 words for each side are about the same thing except one has a positive connotation ("Order", "Freedom") while the other has a negative connotation ("Authoritarianism", "Anarchy"). Obviously, a society cannot function if there are no basic rules to maintain stability and safety. According to Maslow's hierachy of needs, safety is one of the most basic needs humans have to fulfill. True Darwinism "survival of the fittest" will make men extremely primitive as all energies are spent looking out for one's back. Individuality may be well and good but you won't survive well and live beyond subsistence levels without teamwork. Conversely, men do not like being oppressed, having thought and expression controlled by authoritarian dictators like YHVH, even if such "communist" societies provide communal support and stability. Besides, absolute power corrupts absolutely, and to entrust everyone's lives and happiness in one entity (YHVH) is foolish, no matter how "perfect" he is made out to be.
If you look at the world around you, you would notice that no economy that is purely "communist" is prosperous, no economy that is purely "capitalist" exists because they don't last long if truly left to market forces. Even the American economy is a mixed economy. Men are omnivores, dietricians say it is good to have a balanced meal. There is Yin and Yang. Organisms cannot survive in extreme heat nor extreme cold. The earth's health is deteriorating not because of Neutrality (Balance) but because of a lack of Balance. Everyone's producing and consuming but no one thought about regrowing and reducing, we have tipped the balanced towards the extreme of consumerism.
In the game, Law and Chaos seemed to paint the other party as the "bad guys" while thinking themselves to be the "heroes" ( and viewing Neutral as the stupid agnostic moderates who need to be crushed). It is always "Us' VS "Them" for Law and Chaos, and you would notice that all troubles stem from the meddling hands and stubborn views of these 2 sides. Whereas Neutral doesn't see any side as "heroes" or "villains", rather it sees Law and Chaos for what they truly are - "extremism".184.108.40.206 07:29, March 19, 2011 (UTC)
It depends. From what I've seen of the Neutral endings (Shin Megami Tensei 2 and Nocturne, with them also being the most cited examples), they have a very humanistic theme to them, believing in the power of people and choice rather than siding with any supernatural force to depend on. Strange Journey's Neutral ending also has the same themes with an air of hope, even after the hard critcisms on of humanity's place in the world. Digital Devil Saga's ending, one people say is incredibly positive, doesn't seem to side on either Law or Chaos, but has traits of a Neutral ending similar to Nocturne's (though, of course, it lacks more sides to take). Persona 4's true ending, an ending people say is one of the most positive in the entire franchise, is clearly neutral in relation to the other games while rejecting Law. Devil Survivor breaks the chain hopeful neutral endings with Yuzu's path, but returns to it with Gin's ending and what people say is a rejection or demonization of the Chaos endings (though, those are rather shakey). Of course, these are rather vague about the future while the Law and Chaos definitely show where you're choices lead to. I've heard many arguements, and one that I most agree with is that the Neutral ending is either good or bad on whether you believe humanity can fallow through on the second chance it's been given in most games, whether it will become better or worse for the future. And on how much credit you can give text messages. -- Otogi 12:57, September 23rd, 2010
You are the man, boy. Neutral is more of a "human" ending, whilist Chaos and Law are of Demons and Angles respectively and their "way of seeing things". Demons represent people without much hope on a normal society, but would be best on a society where only the strong and able survive. Law represent obsessive and ordered people who think with a very closed perception of justice and rightfulness. Neutral represents all of what's in between, and someties all of these end up eclipsed by both Chaotic and Lawful ideas. The point of neutral is to take actions on human hands, those who judge with great prejudice will see it as selfish, when they themselves are also being selfish, maked as a "labor of god" (in strange journey, there was no sign that masatema acutally ever recieved order from YHWH). Personally I see neutral as the human side, we can be selfish, but we can also work together to achieve great things. Humanity if full of potnetial, as Gore said, and it's up to humanity to decide the future of the planet, which is ours.
However one thing I have to notice is that in SMT2, all of the paths have one same goal: to free the world from YHWH's tyranny, although all of them had different motives.(Law wanted to start a new order the "correct way", Chaos wanted to make a new, free world, under Lucifer's command, which is not that good of an option; and Neutral wanted to get rid of all demons that humanity cling on, so they can stand for themselves.)
BunkerMan is correct to an extent, but it's not like Chaos is any less selfish. SMT2 isn't very clear what a Neutral alignment is in that game, save for murdering the hell out of everyone. As for not challenging the status quo, right, but neutrality implies faith in humanity and its ability to fix its mistakes. That view of what neutrality allows to happen is very cynical. I, myself, can say without a shadow of a doubt that it would be my choice in an actual MegaTen scenario -- either extreme has too many downsides and humans, for all their flaws, aren't irredeemable jerks.
In different games Neutrality has meant different things. In Majin Tensei II a Neutral party removes the influence of both Heaven and Hell (called "Amnesia" and "Paranoia" respectively) from the human world and then fixes its major problems. In Majin Tensei: Blind Thinker, Nagisa (the neutral heroine, basically) wants to coexist with demons rather than murdering all of them even if that's way too idealistic a solution. And so on and so forth. --Asema 14:26, October 20, 2010 (UTC)
Let me guess what the alignments are basically. In LAW you're siding with God or the gods, in CHAOS you're siding with demons, and in NEUTRAL you side with yourself or humanity, am I right? Also, with do LIGHT, NEUTRAL (LND), and DARK mean when it comes to taking sides? GalaxiaWild 08:49, March 19, 2011 (UTC)