Kitsune9tails

Yes, but the Devs can't base a pricing model on how much you like their stuff.

Well, they could, but then you'd be an employee.

dsm?

I think the distinction is important.

Jason Voorhees, for example, presumably has massive brain damage. He may be medically incapable of having a guilt/hesitation reflex, and he may be unable to comprehend that killing people is wrong or bad. If that is indeed a curable medical condition, it should be cured, depending on cost and practicality.

Movie!Magneto, on the other hand, is presumably medically sane. He intends nothing but good for society, usually. He is shown to have a guilt/hesitation reflex, and definitely understands the extent to which his actions are socially unacceptable. His choices are made out of logic (he has resources unavailable to most people), and his will to do what he feels needs to be done. He is incurable in a medical sense. To change his actions, you would either have to inflict a medical condition or change his circumstances (or at least his perspective).

Note that I'm not saying his decision to murder every baseline human on the planet was correct, simply that it wasn't the result of a curable medical condition.

Haven't seen First Class, by the way.

Color me intrigued.

Have you any book recommendations?

I was just making reference to the fact that a bit of antisocial behaviour might be accepted or even expected from a person fighting to survive day to day, whereas a person with a 'good life' is more clearly behaving outside social norms when they toss their advantages right back in society's collective face.

Conceded. However, I am speaking in reference to a lot of things, but in particular a line from Frank Miller's Sin City (the comic, not the movie) where a character says something like, "The shrinks say I'm sociopathic. But I know I'm just evil."

Well if the most blatantly antisocial acts cannot be defined as evil, then we can at least call them antisocial. Sociopathic. Psychopathic. Medical conditions. Curable medical conditions. But how far should we go to cure them, and we ready...can we be ready to deal with the consequences of doing so? And where should we draw the line between 'detriment to society' and 'annoying'?

Can I have a wine cooler instead?

Clark Kent can easily find or even manufacture precious objects that would bring him untraceable wealth. Even without that he has a good job at a prestigious newspaper, or prior to that a comfortable existence as a farm boy. He doesn't need to eat or sleep, and he can't be killed or even injured. Yet he goes out of his way to battle people who can injure or kill him, or threaten his reputation and his loved ones.

He had a few friends (Harry, Gwen) and potential to be a great chemist, supported by the love of his aunt. Not top tier, but far from homeless refugee.

She defied her mother, the queen and illegally took part in a dangerous tournament because she beleived that "Man's World" as described to her was so corrupt, she felt compelled to come to them as a living example of a better life. The More You Know.

Specifically, she was being worshipped (unwillingly) as a goddess when she took up with the X-Men. Then again, Xavier does have mental powers...

That is the definition that I am challenging here. Many villains beleive themselves to be acting for the betterment of society, and can draw you a road map from here to there. I am proferring an alternative conjecture; what if some people just can't care because of how they are wired, almost literally. And if that can be fixed, should it?

Let me apply my hypothesis and see what I come up with:

Lex Luthor: understands social norms, never shows hesitation or guilt over the antisociality of his actions. Sociopath.
Frank Castle: understands social norms, never (?) shows hesitation/guilt? Sociopath. Has occaisionally been a psychopath, unable to see the social ramifications of his actions.
Justin Hammer: Lex knock-off (but a good one)
Dexter Douglas: Is this the kid from Dexter's Laboratory? Despite his genius, his brain is still maturing. Probably still clinically both psychopathic and sociopathic.
Dexter Morgan (I missed the last 2 seasons, no spoilers please): seems to have developed both hesitation and a conscience. Still suffers from antisocial compulsions. Inner monologue however suggests that he is only capable of recognizing social cues through rote memorization and great conscious effort. Psychopath, but not a sociopath (as of the end of season 3).

Do I win?

Oops! My bad.

I think we should have both.

I think story paths should be brightly labelled in blinking neon for those who want them, but there should also be additional Contacts that are discovered/unlocked through exploration and in-game decisions. The fact that there are 'hidden' Contacts should be made obvious as well at first, then the player turned loose to look for them or not.

Some people don't like a sandbox type experience. Others hate being railroaded.

We can satisfy both camps.