u/SprinklesNumerous774

I wanted to write this post to address a common perception in the main sub that I feel is still quite prevalent.

I’ve noticed a significant number of players judging the morality of a decision almost entirely based on its outcome. The general view is that if the outcome turn out to be a success then decision become good & if it fails then decison becomes bad.

Whether it is about cutting Visi in epi 7 or cutting Coupé or Sonar in epi 3, there is an underlying assumption that is subconsciously active that "what the player can predetermined by looking at the larger picture of the story & how the story events could unfold, the characters in the game are also somewhat expected to make decisions with the same hindsight". They are already expected to see the full picture same as players.

In a recent post in the main sub, someone described it as hypocritical for Blazer to straight up suggesting to cut off Visi after her disobedience, while later using a softer parental approach when trying to reconcile with former Z-Team members whom she had previously cut.

I genuinely want to know how blazer using COLD approach would have helped the situation any better? Especially when a former employee is already standing against her in the battle field.

If I have a slightest chance to convince my opponent, making them to stop causing further destruction and assist heroes in saving lives which might makeup for all the destruction they cause & potentially earn their seat back in the z-team. Then why would I not take a SOFT approach first. How is that being a hypocrite?

Is it because Blazer boldly brought the decision to fire Visi after the tragedy of epi 6, so she expected to react the same? Visi's decision to go on a mission alone eventually turn out to be successful in the end, Not disputing this at all. However what happened that day was an extremely serious incident, and no reasonable management would simply brush it aside without atleast again ATLEAST considering removing her.

Whether Visi ultimately gets cut is still at Robert's/player's discretion. But the decision to consider cutting her isn't inherently unreasonable. Blazer can't see the future. A person can make a perfectly rational decision based on the circumstances in front of them and their understanding of the situation at that moment. Whether that decision eventually produces a good or bad outcome is not something they can control. Same in case of Coupe or Sonar. So, she don't have to be apologetic about her decision if it was made with a rational analysis.

I wanted to write this post to address a common perception in this sub that I feel is still quite prevalent.

I’ve noticed a significant number of players judging the morality of a decision almost entirely based on its outcome. The general view is that if the outcome turn out to be a success then decision become good & if it fails then decison becomes bad.

Whether it is about cutting Visi in epi 7 or cutting Coupé or Sonar in epi 3, there is an underlying assumption which is subconsciously active that "what the player can predetermined by looking at the larger picture of the story & how the story events could unfold, the characters in the game are also somewhat expected to make decisions with the same hindsight". They are already expected to see the full picture same as players.

In a recent post, someone described it as hypocritical for Blazer to straight up suggesting to cut off Visi after her disobedience, while later using a softer parental approach when trying to reconcile with former Z-Team members whom she had previously cut.

I genuinely want to know how blazer using COLD approach would have helped the situation any better? Especially when a former employee is already standing against her in the battle field.

If I have a slightest chance to convince my opponent, making them to stop causing further destruction and assist heroes in saving lives which might makeup for all the destruction they cause & potentially earn their seat back in the z-team. Then why would I not take a SOFT approach first. How is that being a hypocrite?

Is it because Blazer boldly brought the decision to fire Visi after the tragedy of epi 6, so she expected to react the same? Visi's decision to go on a mission alone eventually turn out to be successful in the end, Not disputing this at all. However what happened that day was an extremely serious incident, and no reasonable management would simply brush it aside without at least again AT LEAST considering removing her.

Whether Visi ultimately gets cut is still at Robert's/player's discretion. But the decision to consider cutting her isn't inherently unreasonable. Blazer can't see the future. A person can make a perfectly rational decision based on the circumstances in front of them and their understanding of the situation at that moment. Whether that decision eventually produces a good or bad outcome is not something they can control. Same in case of Coupe or Sonar. So, she don't have to be apologetic about her decision if it was made with a rational analysis.

Just a random thought came to my mind. In S2 if we get the second date then for the people(including me) who choosed "Either". In which form doing you think Mandy will finally decide to come on a date. Mandy or Blazer? I know most people would say 'Mandy' because that's her original self, that's where she can just be herself and I too agree with that. However, it's not like she can't be her real self in Blazer form anymore especially around Robert, now that he & others knows her truth. I tends to believe that she is most likely gonna be Mandy. But then after I try to dissect her personality from the information we have, I'm not able to finalize one solid answer. Because I keep thinking what if this time she decides to show Robert "what a date with Blonde Blazer look like?" tbh even I don't know what does that suppose to mean😅. Anyways do you think Dev will give a complete new surprise or will they handle it quite uniquely for the people who choosed 'either'. Please give your inputs.