Daniel vs Mandus

[Diz]

I prefer Daniel. I feel he was much easier to connect with, not only because I used to have something like nyctophobia myself, but because I feel his character is much more open. When compared to Oswald, Daniel gives me a much better impression of being at the wrong places at the wrong times, having his mind manipulated by a tradegic expedition's eerie aftermath and wanting to stop the supernatural from killing even more innocent people to the point he let himself be brainwashed by Alexander and eventually making him insane. Oswald's goal was on a whole different level. In order to "save" humanity, he seemed wanting to wipe it all out, killing all and every person, including his own children. From my impressions (I will have to re-play A Machine For Pigs, though) I currently feel Daniel's story and actions are much more defendable than Oswald's.

Regarding what you say about Daniel's revenge on Alexander, we might be able to discuss this in more detail. I will start by asking, did Daniel really seek revenge on Alexander for corrupting him contrary to victimizing innocent people? Amnesia: The Dark Descent has three main endings, which ultimately is up to the player to decide. This might be another reason why I felt connected to Daniel. You could chooes to take revenge, yes. However, if you choose to help Agrippa through the portal, perhaps you are motivated by all the victims, including Agrippa? You may even feel for Alexander's situation and let him through the gate. There is no official ending, as far as I know, as the players individually need to judge that. I only played one of the endings of A Machine For Pigs (not sure if there are more than one? I assume there would be at least two).

Daniel furthermore wins points for his bravery. Yep, I said it. Let me explain. Daniel has nyctophobia, a very intense fear of the dark and the unknown. He could have been hospitalized for staying in the darkness even just for a bit, it's what phobias potentially do. They are intense. Despite this, Daniel pushed himself onward through an ancient living nightmare of a dark, deserted castle. Granted, there was only one way to go, but he did push through, instead of being stuck in one part of the castle long enough to get caught by the Guardian. Daniel has a bigger reason than anyone to be terrified and incapacitated of the lurking gatherers and kaernk. Oswald was scared, obviously, but he did not have a condition to hinder his progress, a fever means nothing compared to nyctophobia, and the lack of effects and penalties around creatures I believe also helps suggesting that. I would push on strongly if my children were in danger, perhaps hesitate a bit before pushing on in A Machine For Pigs, but if I had that intense fear of the dark and unknown, I would never have made it through The Dark Descent.

All in all, my conclusion is that I feel Daniel was a good person, wanted a good life, and I feel The Dark Descent shows us how much a series of events, including the amnesia effect, can dramatically change a good person into a mindless monster. Oswald, before his amnesia, had given entirely up on humanity and seemingly wanted to wipe all of it for a questionable vision. I like both characters, of course, but Daniel remains my favourite. ^^