Daniel vs Mandus

[LHudson]

Which is why I was hoping, despite all evidence to the contrary, that Mandus would have turned out to be a good man. Instead he has a lot in common with his great-uncle Alexander.

Mandus has a rather creepy amount of sexual repression. He'd spied on his wife long before his supernaturally-endowed madness, and he apparently enjoys masturbating to his own image while indulging himself in nihilistic thoughts. Daniel may have been fearful and weak-minded, but I never saw him as an egotist or pervert.

That's the thing I like about Mandus, he feels more human than Daniel. Sure he may have some unlikable traits but then again, who doesn't haven't negative traits about them? Daniel slaughtered people for his personal gain, Mandus is a creepy pervert, and I like Ride to Hell: Retribution. Thing is, Daniel feels more shallow and harder to sympothise. I would've like to see what happened during the month between the expedition and the moment he picked up his pen. I wanted to know more about his family life but got few sentences on the subject.

[Alardem]

Which is why I was hoping, despite all evidence to the contrary, that Mandus would have turned out to be a good man. Instead he has a lot in common with his great-uncle Alexander.

Mandus has a rather creepy amount of sexual repression. He'd spied on his wife long before his supernaturally-endowed madness, and he apparently enjoys masturbating to his own image while indulging himself in nihilistic thoughts. Daniel may have been fearful and weak-minded, but I never saw him as an egotist or pervert.

That's the thing I like about Mandus, he feels more human than Daniel. Sure he may have some unlikable traits but then again, who doesn't haven't negative traits about them? Daniel slaughtered people for his personal gain, Mandus is a creepy pervert, and I like Ride to Hell: Retribution. Thing is, Daniel feels more shallow and harder to sympothise. I would've like to see what happened during the month between the expedition and the moment he picked up his pen. I wanted to know more about his family life but got few sentences on the subject.

All the better, I suppose, that we never know even Daniel's last name.

Spoiler below!

Daniel Mandus from Mayfair.

[Cuyir]

Which is why I was hoping, despite all evidence to the contrary, that Mandus would have turned out to be a good man. Instead he has a lot in common with his great-uncle Alexander.

Mandus has a rather creepy amount of sexual repression. He'd spied on his wife long before his supernaturally-endowed madness, and he apparently enjoys masturbating to his own image while indulging himself in nihilistic thoughts. Daniel may have been fearful and weak-minded, but I never saw him as an egotist or pervert.

That's the thing I like about Mandus, he feels more human than Daniel. Sure he may have some unlikable traits but then again, who doesn't haven't negative traits about them? Daniel slaughtered people for his personal gain, Mandus is a creepy pervert, and I like Ride to Hell: Retribution. Thing is, Daniel feels more shallow and harder to sympothise. I would've like to see what happened during the month between the expedition and the moment he picked up his pen. I wanted to know more about his family life but got few sentences on the subject.

I just spat out my water because of the emboldened text hahahahahaha!

[LarryV]

Mandus for me; he's the epitome of proverb, "The road to hell is paved with good intention." Not only that, TCR did well with fleshing him out through the game.

I can, to a point, understand how a person can make bad choices that just seem to just keep piling of themselves, never knowing when it will end or go write. And it's a shame see that a man of that intellect and ingenuity made a machine that did so much wrong in the world.

[TheWalshinator]

I vote Daniel, mostly because you got to choose your fate, and that - while his former self wanted you to kill Alexander, you were given the rest of the game to decide whether or not you should.
Personally, I connected more with Daniel. And not just because he has my name

[Xenomorph]

I felt like I knew I was the bad guy the whole time with Mandus. Whereas with Daniel it was more about what you had actually been apart of. The darkness is terrifying and confusing and adds a lot of depth to what is happen to you and what has transpired.

[Mr. 3vil]

I just spat out my water because of the emboldened text hahahahahaha!

Ride to Hell, It's the worst game of all time... so bad that it's funny, but not funny when you're actually playing it. It's almost like the new Sharknado except it's so bad that even Sharknado does a better job.

[Janakev]

I'll be slated for saying this, I'm sure but I have to go with Daniel. Mandus feels... almost cartoonish in his villainy. He's the archetypal "well-intentioned extremist" who damns humanity to save it from itself. I couldn't connect with him because everything he does is so much larger than life, like a Dickensian villain who's been turned up to hyperbolic proportions.

Daniel, for me, is the classic tragic hero who dooms himself in his attempts to save himself. He starts out looking for something to take back to the British Museum, maybe motivated by personal glory as well but still a noble pursuit. His pursuit by the shadow, his slow slipping into evil--contrast his initial reluctance to do wrong with the flashback at the alter near the choir where he chides Alexander for interrupting him in cutting a man and later expresses concern that another will be killed 'too quickly'--realisation of what he's become and his attempts to undo his evil.

I suppose Mandus has that in common with him but as I've said, it's hampered somewhat by how ludicrous it all is. I never got a sense that Mandus wrestled with his conscience, he just snaps and throws himself off the deep end. Daniel just feels more personal; he's pushed by desperation into doing what he does. His evils are much more personal as the pain and fear he inflicts isn't simply lost in numbers. He isn't jovial in his insanity (cf. the note about Selwyn (I forget his title)), he's clinical interspersed with bouts of guilt.

I'll happily discuss all of that, I'd be interested to hear differing opinions on it.

[Alardem]

I'll be slated for saying this, I'm sure but I have to go with Daniel. Mandus feels... almost cartoonish in his villainy. He's the archetypal "well-intentioned extremist" who damns humanity to save it from itself. I couldn't connect with him because everything he does is so much larger than life, like a Dickensian villain who's been turned up to hyperbolic proportions.

Daniel, for me, is the classic tragic hero who dooms himself in his attempts to save himself. He starts out looking for something to take back to the British Museum, maybe motivated by personal glory as well but still a noble pursuit. His pursuit by the shadow, his slow slipping into evil--contrast his initial reluctance to do wrong with the flashback at the alter near the choir where he chides Alexander for interrupting him in cutting a man and later expresses concern that another will be killed 'too quickly'--realisation of what he's become and his attempts to undo his evil.

I suppose Mandus has that in common with him but as I've said, it's hampered somewhat by how ludicrous it all is. I never got a sense that Mandus wrestled with his conscience, he just snaps and throws himself off the deep end. Daniel just feels more personal; he's pushed by desperation into doing what he does. His evils are much more personal as the pain and fear he inflicts isn't simply lost in numbers. He isn't jovial in his insanity (cf. the note about Selwyn (I forget his title)), he's clinical interspersed with bouts of guilt.

I'll happily discuss all of that, I'd be interested to hear differing opinions on it.

That's a pretty good summation - Mandus does get rather grandiose at his worse. I still prefer PLAYING as him, simply because Daniel's phobias became distracting.

[Gilligan's Hell]

Mandus is my favourite story wise.
But if it comes to fear and disturbing visions, daniel.