Honestly, it seemed pretty straightforward to me. If you’re evil but want a negligible amount of NCR reputation for some reason, kill the vault dwellers. If you’re good and don’t care about faction standings, help free them.
We’re not a bunch of unga bunga cavemen who can’t deal with the vault reactor once the survivors are freed. That’s just going to be a problem for the future settlers to handle, there is no chance of sudden starvation as long as the NCR supply lines exist and there is a vested interest in securing the dam and helios.
That’s why I call it half hearted. If you saw actual impacts of further irradiating the drinking water and destroying the food supply of a city with refugees and breadlines, it would’ve been better.
Ah, so half hearted as in an obvious choice. I thought you meant half hearted as in equally bad choices. I guess you’re right that the harder decision would have been a better example of the Trolley problem, but I can’t imagine it would be cooler to make.
Honestly, it seemed pretty straightforward to me. If you’re evil but want a negligible amount of NCR reputation for some reason, kill the vault dwellers. If you’re good and don’t care about faction standings, help free them.
We’re not a bunch of unga bunga cavemen who can’t deal with the vault reactor once the survivors are freed. That’s just going to be a problem for the future settlers to handle, there is no chance of sudden starvation as long as the NCR supply lines exist and there is a vested interest in securing the dam and helios.
That’s why I call it half hearted. If you saw actual impacts of further irradiating the drinking water and destroying the food supply of a city with refugees and breadlines, it would’ve been better.
Ah, so half hearted as in an obvious choice. I thought you meant half hearted as in equally bad choices. I guess you’re right that the harder decision would have been a better example of the Trolley problem, but I can’t imagine it would be cooler to make.