As the title implies this is one of those "but what if....?" questions. So please don't don't take it too serious... We all know how the plot lines go but still I get my curiosity piqued.
Anyways, I'd been listening to the music played when Dante and Vergil fight for the last time (still think it's an epic piece of music) and it got me thinking about the way they parted. My question is: Should Dante have killed Vergil?
Dante knowing full well by then (or at least he should have; don't really want to think he was being that naive or a bit dumb ) that Vergil was on a one way path to his own destruction were nothing could or would change Vergil's mind, and Vergil, knowingly that he'd carry on into hell at the time of his defeat. Ok, so Dante goes to reach for him twice but shouldn't he have "saved" his brother from further suffering? Instead of slashing him and doing injury (you know the bit; the slow-mo running part) actually dealing the killing blow. Can't call it a mercy killing sooo I'm not sure what to call it.
Anyways, I'd been listening to the music played when Dante and Vergil fight for the last time (still think it's an epic piece of music) and it got me thinking about the way they parted. My question is: Should Dante have killed Vergil?
Dante knowing full well by then (or at least he should have; don't really want to think he was being that naive or a bit dumb ) that Vergil was on a one way path to his own destruction were nothing could or would change Vergil's mind, and Vergil, knowingly that he'd carry on into hell at the time of his defeat. Ok, so Dante goes to reach for him twice but shouldn't he have "saved" his brother from further suffering? Instead of slashing him and doing injury (you know the bit; the slow-mo running part) actually dealing the killing blow. Can't call it a mercy killing sooo I'm not sure what to call it.