Well like I've said, the factions were a low-point for me. I didn't care for any of them and it was kind of silly that they kept calling on me. That said though, their apparent desperation to get the PC on-side did make sense, as they knew what he/she could ultimately do.
It means that Alex D is a "chosen one", at least, to some extent and J. C. Denton was such one in the original, too, especially with the ending with a quote from Voltaire, which, I find, most fit the title Deus Ex (machina). Er...sorry if I sounded bit nitpicking. I'll try to strengthen it up a bit.
While both works have much better endings than average video games do by showing simulated results based on suppositions on which the world is driven by single-minded ideologies, adding a philosophical tweak to chosen one setting, as I see it, the problem with DXIW endings more complicated: In DX, J. C. Denton can be a more heroic "chosen one" even if you pick the Machiavellian ending with the quote form Paradise Lost, where Milton finds a certain heroism in Satan. However, in its bleak sequel DXIW, where heroism is alien, Alex D is just a tool for those incarnations of single-minded ideologies. This is thematically effective because there is no perfect one ending. Each faction more or less regards Alex D as a tool to realize their ideology and most likely the players want to settle the score by messing all them up. Indeed, this option would give a player a certain kind of satisfaction but, at the same time, it would ruin the theme. This is another reason why I wrote DXIW rather appeals to our brains than to our hearts. Whether apathy or sympathy, DXIW is more of philosophical simulation where empathy doesn't find its place. These designers may compromise about gameplay but they seem to do so less about the content. Deep in their mind, they are egoistic artists, which is why I may appear to be forgiving (Of course, this doesn't mean I am totally happy with DXIW, though).
OT
Okay, but I thought rather of other kinds of shareholders. Companies, for example.
Has anyone ever tried to produce a list what kind of shareholders gaming companies actually have ?
That may be interesting but I am not a specialist on finance. I am simply tired of seeing "CRPG fans" bashing a certain developers on the net without even basic knowledge about how economy works. CRPG sites now seem to attract people who enjoy a moment of attention and scare off mature posters, resulting in vicious circle (I am quite sure some of posters add comments without reading articles, which is why I often show a part of some articles with quotes). At least, as my handle name implies, I cannot expect bright future in CRPG. That said, I think it would be more constructive if the players supports the designers of their liking. Rather than searching for financial details of companies, I name the designers of my liking and tell why I like them quoting their design philosophies (Well, I'd politely ignore when Spector speak of his love of Disney, though.
) so that someone of a similar taste can benefit from the information. Of course, if someone has insight on the market, I think it probably benefit the community rather than sprinkling wild-goose-chase-like rumors but IMO, the information on games, first. Just my two cents.