I understand why you made this mistake, but Chaos in Zion is the default quest for players who literally kill everyone; Joshua's quest is different.
If you kill everyone, you presumably have looted all this stuff. Plus, the people who present you with it would be dead.
Grahams ending isn't the Chaos I was speaking of. If you go into Zion and kill friendly NPCs you get a quest called Chaos in Zion, and everything is hostile to you. Your mission is then to explore Zion on your own and kill Daniel for the map back to the Mojave. If you take this path then no footlocker appears.
Ah.... I see :spotted owl:
I was aware of the possibility and the outcome (from reading this forum) but I wasn't aware that it actually triggered a quest. Thanks for explaining this. This is something i would never discover myself because I just don't find playing this way enjoyable—but whatever, many do. when i played Daniel's ending the first time I accidentally turned the tribe hostile and had to reload.
This is something I give them credit for as writers.
The evacuation ending seems to be the good ending if one sits down and truly thinks things through. The ending slides all turn out decent this way, whereas Joshua Graham's path will always leave one or two "bad" slides. You can even decide it's the correct ending because of the old "violence begots violence," and the fact that Graham is essentially repeating history, following in his own footsteps from before, as well as those of Caesar. With evacuation, you're essentially acting for the people, whereas with Graham, you're essentially focusing on a place.
And yet? When you leave, you have a bad taste in your mouth, as if you could've done better. Whereas with Graham's path? You feel like you got [censored] done and made a good choice.
Quite a frustrating paradox, but a good job on the dev's part.
I played the "peaceful" ending (Daniel's) first. I didn't think that any of the results were satisfying."Decent" is a good term and I suppose I could sleep at night if it ended that way. However, when I replayed it and chose to help the Sorrows defend themselves (the "violent" or Joshua's ending) everyone prospered and the White Legs got their just deserts.
While Daniel's ending may seem the "good" one, it points out that running away never solves anything. Even when he gets his way, Daniel is still (rightly so, I believe) tortured by the thought that he was wrong.
it is difficult to discuss this as a morality play without stepping on someones religious toes. Particularly since the writers were so overtly peddling Judeo-Christian history and philosophy (I wonder how the Moderators are going to keep a lid on discussions.) This storyline is very much in keeping with the themes of the base game.