That doesn't sound about right. The way I see it, the affinity system would work is this:
Minor choises will still be up to us and we will similarly choose between DIK and CHICK options. Major choices will no longer be in our power and will automatically be given to us based on permanent affinity. And in this sense the affinities are no different.
But even if there is a system like you described, I don't see how Neutral is any different. According to you, if you're Neutral, you'll have Neutral and DIK/CHICK options depending on your gradient, and if you're DIK/CHICK, you'll have DIK/CHICK and Neutral options... But changing the order of addends doesn't change the sum. And being DIK/CHICK you can also find yourself in a situation where you don't like both options and have to choose the lesser evil.
Either I don't understand you, or nothing changes in this equation.
About the very concept of "neutral person." In the case of Being a DIK, I don't mean neutral like Switzerland (which, by the way, is taken very seriously) or Geralt of Rivia. I mean rarely do people act like a crazy aggressive party monster 100% of the time (DIK) or a "very mature" empathic snivel (CHICK). The former can slack off, fall apart, and the latter can get angry and punish the abuser, for example. Beware of a silent dog and still water, as they say. Would such a person be taken less seriously because of that? My experience shows that no.
So Neutral Tremolo is simply a more versatile character, not a follower or undecided.
Really read through the texts.
It is clearly written that if you have a neutral affinity in the future, you sometimes get a
DIK OR a
CHICK selection in addition. I just wonder what the player gets in addition for a
DIK or CHICK selection, because the player may not be able to use the additional
DIK or CHICK selection at all because the selection is absolutely against the player's will. On the other hand, the MC definitely gets the
NEUTRAL option if he is
DIK or CHICK. It is complicated to explain this.
Let's take a purely fictional example for clarification. Sage is lying injured on the floor.
DIK affinity +
NEUTRAL SELECTION:
DIK = Move on
NEUTRAL= Call an ambulance.
CHICK Affinity +
NEUTRAL SELECTION:
CHICK = First aid
NEUTRAL = Call an ambulance
NEUTRAL affinity + ? Selection
(Here's the problem. Does the MC get an additional choice and if so, is it
DIK or CHICK):
NEUTRAL = Call Ambulance
(This is all there is. Stupid to be friends with Sage and not help her personally. Only good so he can call an ambulance).
NEUTRAL = Call ambulance
DIK = Move on
(You have another choice, but still don't personally help Sage and call an ambulance. Or you can be a complete ass and just keep walking )
NEUTRAL = Call ambulance
CHICK = First aid
(You luckily got the
CHICK choice and can actively give Sage first aid or call the ambulance).
I hope the made up example clarifies that from my point of view it is better to be a
DIK or a
CHICK.
NEUTRAL to me is just to put a
DIK or CHICK affinity into perspective. This is basically what EP8's Major Choice shows us as well.
Derek's Revenge:
DIK = The MC goes along
NEUTRAL = The MC doesn't stop Derek, but doesn't want to join in himself.
CHICK = The MC persuades Derek not to take revenge.
I have the options
NEUTRAL and
CHICK in my playthrough. I choose
NEUTRAL because that's how Derek is and that's how my MC met him. Ergo, my MC accepts Derek as he is without the MC violating his
CHICK affinity.
Cheat Sheet:
DIK = The MC studies the answers and puts the cheat sheet back.
NEUTRAL = The MC does not study the answers and puts the cheat sheet back.
CHICK = The MC does not study the answers and flushes the cheat sheet down the toilet.
On
DIK, the MC puts himself and everyone else on the toilet list in danger. On
NEUTRAL, the MC only puts everyone else on the WC list in danger. On
CHICK, the MC puts only the person who did not prepare in danger. (Dawe.)
I always choose
CHICK because only the one who made and hid the cheat sheet should be in danger. Why should those on the WC list suffer when only one acted stupidly. It is the decision of a leader. One is sacrificed for the sake of several.
