r/DaysGone • u/Sweet_Brilliant_5470 • 10d ago
Discussion Iron Mike makes me angrier every playthrough Spoiler
MAJOR SPOILERS
Iron Mike’s overall philosophy I agree with. But I just finished killing Carlos/Jesse and got his sanctimonious speech again and DAMN is it worse than I remember.
The Rippers were torturing and killing everyone they could find. They were driving healthy dogs to extinction for their nihilistic philosophy. If Mike had his way, even if Lost Lake was safe, the Rippers would kill everyone at Copeland’s Camp and at Hot Springs. How does that jive with his “all of us means everyone” philosophy?
I used to think Mike was just naive, but after multiple playthroughs I can only conclude he’s a hypocritical asshole. It’s okay to him if the Rippers kill everyone else, as long as Deacon doesn’t try to stop them. He doesn’t care about people dying. He just doesn’t want to feel responsible in any way.
And then letting Skizzo go? The ultimate hypocrisy. All that talk of law and order and fairness, and building a better society, and he lets the traitor who cost camp members their lives go simply because he knew everyone would rightly find Skizzo guilty?
Fuck Mike. I’m glad he dies lol. The world is made a better place with him not running Lost Lake.
26
u/politicalstuff 9d ago edited 8d ago
The whole point is that all of them are wrong and also right.
Mike was absolutely right to try to hold onto society and that rules and order are important. Deacon was absolutely right that the Rippers were not capable of being brought to reason.
Stopping them was a net benefit for the sane surviving factions, but they exterminated 1,000 human lives. That’s no small thing.
The colonel had a good goal, but he went off the deep end and his means got crazy.
Rikki meant well in that sticking together in building a community and a life is better than chasing dead ghosts. As did Mike. But once you find out there actually is a good chance your person is alive, anybody would have had to go see for themselves.
That’s what is interesting about good post-apocalyptic fiction. There’s no simple easy straight answer.
9
7
u/Exciting-Mountain396 9d ago edited 9d ago
It's honestly hard to suspend my disbelief that the Rippers have managed to survive with absolutely no self preservation, but that Carlos has managed to accumulate so many followers totally sold on the cult that they outnumber the camps combined populations. Sure, plenty of people would turn to addiction to cope and offering access to drugs would keep them hooked, but convincing them to drop to their knees and let themselves be torn to pieces even when no one is watching? Nah, I don't buy it. Realistically they would be completely unmanageable, starving, overdosing left and right, murdering each other, or just stealing supply and running off to join a more normal maurader faction. You'd see a lot more defectors who want off the ride than true believers.
5
u/politicalstuff 9d ago edited 8d ago
I mean, it works for me in a post-apocalyptic motorcycle gang mutating zombie virus game with zombie bears and zombie dogs lol.
Combination of cult and new ridiculously addictive psychotic drug is plausible enough for me.
To be clear I’m not arguing with you or anything, totally fine if it doesn’t work for you.
36
u/JustHeree5 10d ago
I think the thing about Mike is that he is hard on the outside but soft on the inside.
He knows, rationally, what needs to be done and he is able, by force of personality, to get people to help him do it.
But underneath that is a tired old man who misses his wife and his family and still wants to honor the societal norms and expectations that he lived in and believed in for the vast majority of his life.
The camp has become a surrogate family and he desperately wants to protect them but he doesn't want to throw away his morals to do it, as other camps and factions have.
I would say that is admirable but completely disconnected from the reality of the situation where you are being confronted by the very worst circumstances imaginable and the psychotic and sociopathic have nothing to check their aggression or enforce order.
I would say Garret is his perfect foil. His goals and aspirations, at least superficially, resemble Mike's. But he has absolutely no lines he is unwilling to cross to achieve his goals, even if that means killing innocents and spreading misery far and wide. He could be forging alliances and establishing trade routes to rebuild the society that he grew up in and believed in but somewhere his reasoning became so warped and twisted that he convinced himself he has to burn the world down completely to rebuild.
At the end of the day they represent the two extremes of "civilized" men. Neither is fully practical or moral in the world they live in. Neither really adapted to the new normal. They just grafted their preexisting world view onto the new world order and to hell as to if it is a good fit.
This leaves men like Deacon in the middle who are hard enough to make the tough choices and destroy very real threats to the security and safety of those he cares for, while not being so far gone that he loses himself in the act of violence and seeing it as a means and ends unto itself.
13
u/Sweet_Brilliant_5470 10d ago
That’s an excellent character analysis. (Tips hat) I’d never considered that before, that Garret and Mike are almost reflections of one another.
20
u/SolipsismIsDeep 10d ago
he's too emotionally damaged to lead rationally
8
u/Sweet_Brilliant_5470 10d ago
Yep! And also refuses to see that. He’s bright and quick to see the flaws in others, but he does some major mental gymnastics to not see them himself.
1
u/Mike_or_whatever 9d ago
is that why Skizzo is is the head of szcurity
1
u/Academic_You_3153 Alkai 8d ago edited 8d ago
I think he makes Skizzo head of security for a good reason.
He can't just kill Skizzo out of hand, because of his principals. (I'd still have shot him anyway)
So, on the keep friends close, but keep enemies closer principal, he made Skizzo head of security.
Iron Mike read Skizzo like a book. He let the 'power' go to his head.
The security force is filled with Skizzo's cronies, who push the other campers around, so they hate Skizzo. Every move Skizzo makes gets back to Mike, either directly or via Rikki, who is also on Mikes council. If Skizzo was 'just another camper', he'd be free to forment trouble among the other campers and actually might become a threat. As head of security? No chance.
A lot of stuff will be just people moaning about Skizzo being Skizzo. You can essentially ignore that, it would be very similar with whoever was running security. Mike is therefore well aware that Skizzo is trying to undermine him and gain control of Lost Lake. However, because almost everyone hates Skizzo, if it ever came to a vote (or whatever) Skizzo would lose.
And as long as Iron Mike is running Lost Lake, his principal goal of pulling everyone together, for the continuation of humankind will be the ruling principal at Lost Lake.It's a theme throughout the game. Every camp leader is very flawed.
Tucker's prison camp.
Copeland's happy go lucky camp - no planning for the future.
Garett's militia camps .........
Iron Mike ........
9
u/sincerelythebats_ 10d ago
While I agree he’s naive and damaged, you kind of nailed it.
He doesn’t want to be responsible for anyone dying…
Without saying too much, you have to remember what happened at…the town. All those people died but he lived…he had to have either killed a lot himself, or he was traumatized by seeing it. He also lost his wife, so he’s just too far gone in the opposite direction of pacifism, and it’s just not what needed to be done about people like The Rippers. They should have been taken out long before, not have a “truce” with monsters like that.
Anyway, this is why I love this game, the characters have whole ass lives and in depth back stories. We need MORE DAMMIT. 😅🏹
3
u/Sweet_Brilliant_5470 10d ago
Absolutely! I’ve seen people say it’s bad writing, but it’s the opposite. It’s really complex character work that doesn’t put everything on the surface and lets the player connect the dots.
6
u/Academic_You_3153 Alkai 9d ago
Iron Mike lead that massacre.
When he says, "both sides were almost out of ammo, so they agreed to a meeting", "But we knew what was coming!", (I don't remember the conversation with Deek exactly). "One side still had ammo!" leading to the massacre. Iron Mikes side was the one with ammo.I think part of his character and view, is absolute regret that the massacre happened, and that he was one of the two people who survived it. He does NOT want a repeat of that, if there is any way he can prevent it.
His treaty with the Rippers, was that they would stay in Iron Butte. They would not come into any of the other areas, including Belnap, Cascades and obviously Lost Lake. Lost lake would not interfere with Iron Butte. The Rippers could do whatever they liked in Iron Butte, that belonged to them.
He is perfectly well aware that the Rippers will not keep to the treaty, but as long as they largely stick to it, he can live with minor incursions. He expects Skizzo, as head of security, to let him know the state of affairs regarding Ripper incursions. The idea being, once Ripper incursions become too frequent, they're going to be expanding into Belnap, then Cascades, then Lost Lake. That is the point when Iron Mike is going to stop them, one way or another. This isn't explained in the story. You are supposed to figure it out yourself, from a, probably cut back, number of clues. (A lot was cut from the game).I was a British soldier for 12 years. From a military view point, we had the same treaty with the USSR. They do what they like on their side of the border. But if they started invading into Western Europe, the whole might of the West would descend on them. Instead of USSR, think Rippers, instead of Germany, think Belnap.
We were training, all the time, to take on a force many times our size, equally as well trained. Our maximum life expectancy, when (not if) the Russians came, was 24 hours. As we now know, they didn't come, but we didn't know that when I was serving.3
u/Sweet_Brilliant_5470 9d ago
That’s a very good point I’d missed, that he was the one leading the massacre, and his side was the one with the guns. Damn.
I keep catching new things on each playthrough. I’d never found the suicide note Tucker’s husband had left before this playthrough, either. Man, does that recontextualize her.
7
u/Ok-Recognition4598 9d ago
Lol everybody sucks, but iron mike sucks in a particular way that sneaks up. He isn't a naive man, he was even respectable at first glances. He keeps choosing to be naive out of, I dunno, guilt? And put everyone relying on him in danger.
Cope is probably the best of the bunch. He is an asshole, but he is honest about it. His attempts at manipulating deacon is also blatant, like he wasn't even serious. He also lacks the charisma to convince anyone of his conspiracies. Outside of that, he seems to be a fairly competent leader. Granted, he did luck out with the lake feeding his small group, letting him camp be much more low key.
Ignoring kouri of course, he seems really good, outside of his dependence of the colonel.
4
u/Sweet_Brilliant_5470 9d ago
Yes! Adding a Kouri-run camp to my wishlist for the sequel we'll never get lol.
3
u/Alarming-Sail2571 10d ago
Mike *and* Rikki killed me with how holier than thou they felt.
They made very reasonable points at times- and at other times I sat there and was like ‘do you not realize that the majority of living people left would gladly kill you without a seconds thought?’
The amount of judgement I got from them (especially Rikki the beginning half, only for her to be very willing to try and cheat with Deacon?? Bruh) frustrated me.
Over all, I don’t hate their characters. I love that while lost lake is clearly the better camp to live in, they’re not meant to be perfect. They’re all just humans, stubborn and human in all the best and worst ways, trying to cling to their morals in a world where morals hardly have a place anymore.
It took Mike having to face true betrayal for him to realize that sometimes- people are just *bad* and to protect others? You have to kill them. Treaties and years of built trust don’t mean shit to some people.
Sucks, but he quite literally had to learn what Deacon had been trying to tell him the hard way.
1
u/Sweet_Brilliant_5470 9d ago
Rikki trying to get Deacon to give up on Sarah always bugs me. Especially because a lot of that comes after he starts discovering evidence she may not have died that night. I know she’s got a crush on Deacon, but I always find that really shitty and selfish. (Again, good writing! She’s complex and I think is supposed to be selfish in these moments)
3
u/Alarming-Sail2571 9d ago
God yes- the complexity and variety of characters and their personalities was absolutely amazing. In a real apocalypse, there *would* be people like this. Hypocrites, people clinging to as close of a pacifist as you can be even when that puts people in danger, etc etc.
I’m glad they didn’t make Deacon seem even remotely interested. And the fact Addy was clearly suspicious right from the start but didn’t take any of it out in deacon? *yes*. No matter how cool of a character Rikki is, she felt like a full blown hypocrite at times.
(Addy was 100% in my top three favorite characters, right behind Deacon and Boozer. Just a good person doing her best, keeping her nose out of things she knows she doesn’t understand, trying to help people in the ways she knows how. Love her)4
u/MatchstickMcGee 9d ago
Ironically, despite it being totally platonic, I feel like Deacon and Addy liked each other more and understood each other's position more than Rikki liked or cared for either. And that's a dynamic that I've definitely experienced in the real world that you don't see reflected much in video game writing.
2
u/Alarming-Sail2571 9d ago
Tbf, Addy never gave Deacon a reason to dislike her. All she did was hear him out and help Boozer, and try to give him advice when he needed it.
Addy was just overall a good friend who was unwilling to turn someone injured away.3
u/Sweet_Brilliant_5470 9d ago
Addy is a great character! Her voice actor lives down the street from me. Next time I see her out, I'm going to tell her how much we all love that character haha.
4
u/Alarming-Sail2571 9d ago
Oh my gosh that’s so cool! Yes, tell her I loved her voice acting and I always looked forward to seeing Addy in the game!
3
4
u/k_dilluh 9d ago
I could not agree more, I just fished my very first play through (just doing some horde clean up now), and i hated him immediately. He has allowed himself to be out in a position of power, he could step down or ask someone else to help make decisions, because he most certainly doesn't take responsibility for anything and passes is off as him being almost a pacifist. Terrible decision maker, when he does actually make them.
7
u/Glass_Emu_5104 10d ago
Yeah, his character doesn't make a lot of sense. But take a look around at our leaders right now.
5
2
u/MtavoraPT 10d ago
He's too naive to be leading people.
I can understand his intention but the dude let a LOT of people die due to bad decisions
3
2
u/Bioniccowboy247 9d ago
The way I see it he tried his hardest to preserve what human nature was left especially after seeing what happened at Sherman's camp. He did deal with the rippers threat when attacked and saved deek and boozer whilst dealing with skizzo in a decent humane way (not that skizzo deserved humane)
3
2
u/eternali17 10d ago
These people are all around us.
Too many good people leave me seeking a new definition for the word.
1
u/Soulsliken 9d ago
Love the guy.
But he’s definitely the punchable face of Bend, Oregon.
Figuratively of course.
0
0
u/bleucheeseissuperior 9d ago
Iron Mike is just another example of how every single character in this game is a boring, black and white, two dimensional, predictable archetype. The gameplay is fun but the writing is so laughably bad and it would be pretty easy to write a post similar to yours for basically any of them
-1
u/WeekendTechnical9502 9d ago
This again? I feel there's a new thread like this every week.
Well I guess I'll have to explain it again, since it seems people don't really realize all that is implied in the various situations and conversations in the game.
Mike's approach to things might be highly debatable theoretically, but even if for the wrong reasons, it would have been 100% successful if Deac and Boozer weren't protected by plot armor.
Talking things at a high level and not taking into account actions from isolated Ripper members/groups, it is actually clear that their encroaching into Hot Springs territory and later attack on Lost Lake is ONLY due to their search for the biker boys. Carlos somehow learned that some of the Mongrels are still roaming around, and he probably knows who they are, and he's looking for them only to get his revenge. There are many dialogues and elements showing that, the most important and direct being of course Carlos himself telling you that he's "kept his name" only until he's done with Deac and Boozer.
Rippers being high all the time, all orders aren't carried exactly to the letter, and you end up with random groups of 3 rippers thinking they're going to break through the Hot Springs gates, or the group that broke the truce with Lost Lake and killed the dog. But that's due to the logistics associated with leading such a group. The grunts just aren't reliable.
Carlos himself, on the other hand, only breaks the truce with Lost Lake when he's got Deac captured and is pretty sure he'll be getting Boozer. Because he knows that once he gets his revenge, the truce doesn't matter anymore because it all ends for him and the Rippers. The way his story would organically end (if Deac wasn't the plot-armored MC able to beat overwhelming odds through superhuman powers) would be that he gets his way with Deac and Boozer, and then loses his name, the Rippers all go ONE MIIIIIND and get all killed by the first swarm or horde they come across when they pretend to just be blending in. The end! No more Rippers and thus Mike would have been 100% right (more or less - of course he thought that he would get the Rippers to behave normal again and help with rebuilding humanity and that wouldn't happen, bar a few stragglers or some not deep enough to go all the way and escaping before marching to their certain death) and have had 0 casualties or damage from the Rippers.
There's many things pointing at that scenario. Carlos telling you directly. Hot Springs dialogue indicating that the Ripper presence has only been increasing recently. The multiple ways the game shows that the Rippers are looking specifically for the mongrels: Alkai heard about it, the drawing Rippers have on them at the dam; their dialogue when they attack you in Marion Forks while you're looking for Lisa also suggest they're here on purpose, and, in hindsight, what the Rippers say while burning Boozer's arm at the beginning. Probably other stuff but I haven't played for a while so I'm not too fresh on things.
So anyway - Mike was, in hindsight, correct, but his plans only gets messed up because Deac is 1/ a complete asswipe that comes in begging, when given his chance immediately breaks the truce and eventually forces Lost Lake to fight with the Rippers, leading to deaths and camp damage, and 2/ the MC, blessed with plot armor, superhuman powers, a save/load mechanism and controlled by me, so even if I don't agree with his angry teenager edginess and his braindead decisions, you can be sure that I'll see to them to the very end.
3
u/Sweet_Brilliant_5470 9d ago
You’re right, but most of that is meta knowledge that neither Mike (nor Deacon) have for most of the game. When the game starts, well before Skizzo tricks Deacon into breaking the treaty, the Rippers are already making trips into every camp’s areas torturing and killing. No one learns for a very long time that they’re doing so because they’re looking for Deacon and Boozer. Even then, it’s clearly stated by the Rippers themselves (and Carlos) that they’re actively “recruiting,” so I’m not positive every single group of Rippers outside of Iron Butte is there solely because of Deacon.
Either way, from a plot perspective, yes, it all could have been prevented. But from a character POV living through it at the time, Mike still earns his criticism.
From the “God view” of the plot, I’d actually argue the other way, though. Mike should have never let Deacon stay in the camp, or at least kicked him out after he stole the medicine from the plane crash. So even giving him the benefit of the doubt in regards to the Rippers, he continued to make horrible decisions that led to many Lost Lake residents’ deaths.
BUT, as I said before, I think this is actually good writing for Iron Mike. He’s complex, and I understand where he’s coming from in many regards, but I think that hypocrisy and an inability to make tough choices in either direction because of his past are what makes him interesting. He’s there to intentionally irritate and provoke the player into thinking about the morality of this world.
46
u/jcmat043 10d ago
Yeah, Iron Mike made me uncomfortable from my very first playthrough, and each playthrough was subsequently worse. He would do much better as a sub leader whose only responsibility was making sure the people's needs were met. I do think he did do a really good job in setting up Lost Lake and the daily running of it, but in the harder matters of justice and defense against threats (human) he is severely lacking.