I see plenty of excuses going round stating the player should ‘fill in the gaps’ themselves – or head-canon the whole evil route.
Could you point me towards some?
You know the John Banville guy I mentioned? He had a good one about this guy who tried to trip him once about his brilliantly scathing review of Iain McEwan's Saturday. The guy didn't address the review, he just addressed what he perceived to be a technical error Banville made about tennis. The quote from Banville is 'Summoned, one shuffles guiltily into the realm of trivia.'
Your patterns are pretty obvious at this point, so I’ll keep this as mechanical and reductionist as I can.
Both:
‘YOU, the player, decides what your motivation is’
And:
‘All motivation you need is right there, its simply not just explicitly said to you ... you sort of have to figure it out yourself’
= player has to invent an intelligent narrative reason for taking the evil path because the writers couldn’t devise one naturally.
