SWTOR is not Star Wars

[gothshark]

Which brings me back to the idea of my original post: this is not in the spirit of Star Wars as I interpret it.

 

It is clear you only see the poorly written movies as a basis for your ideas of how the Star Wars universe should be. The reality is the majority of Star Wars fans are inspired by the Extended Universe, for me it was the Comic books, for others it was the Books, and RPGs. Star Wars is bigger and more complicated than what George Lucas envisioned, it is why Disney now owns it, and why the EU will grow at a Disney sized pace.

 

I recommend reading The Old Republic comic books, or if you can find them the original Star Wars Comics from the 80's. There was so much more to the universe added that it became better than what George Lucas could make.

[Ghisallo]

Mentally ill people are actually a lot more likely to be the victims of violence than the perpetrators, so how about you don't perpetuate the narrative that is one of the lead causes for that violence?

 

Sincerely, a mentally ill person who is all kinds of done with that bs.

 

Also, the Empire *is* evil. Slavery, racism, a totalitarian state, eugenics programmes.... That doesn't mean every Imperial is evil, but the Empire itself? Certainly is. Still no argument not to let it be a playable faction since playing a villain=/=agreeing with their actions, and as you said, you can actually play your PC to be a lot more morally gray (or almost heroic if they didn't still serve the Empire) if you want to.

 

Just to your first point. I think people often mistake people with more so "emotional" issues as being mentally ill and when they think mentally ill they are thinking meeting the definition of criminal insanity.

 

Yesterday I took a class taught by Dale Yeager, one of only 60 certified Criminal behavior Analysts in the Country. He spoke about Sociopaths and Psychopaths (yes in Criminal Forensics they are different...in his words The DSM-V is written by people overly concerned with politics and billing hours, they need to stay away from calling themselves experts when it comes to Criminal Cases.)

 

Regarding the Sociopath and/or Psychopath he said...

 

what makes these people scary is that they are not what we typically call "mentally ill". They know exactly what they are doing, know that it is wrong, they just don't care and THIS is what makes them scary.

 

I think this sums up a Darkside Sith Lord pretty well, don't you?

Edited May 13, 2015 by Ghisallo

[SelinaH]

I believe that in terms of game design, the Empire/Dark-side is there to allow people to indulge in the fantasy of EVIL.

 

And here is the argument: I am NOT judging this as right or wrong,

I find this social dynamic a disgusting perversion, and a sad and low catering by BW to the particular player base that would never play this game if this option weren't available.*

 

*(sad because it gives people a "thrill" without asking them to consider the morality of their fantasy)

Sorry, but calling something a "disgusting perversion" seems pretty judgmental to me.

But at the end of your compelling story filled with evil and immoral decisions, you are the hero and you are not in any way asked (by the story) to reflect upon what you have done and face the consequences of following the path of the dark side.

Here's the thing: I'm here to play a game, not go to confession. My enjoyment comes largely from exploring character psychology and motivation in the context of the sociopolitical framework of the Star Wars universe. Being forced to play a cardboard cutout, two-dimensional hero simply isn't interesting to me -- because most people IRL aren't perfect little white knights with no flaws, either.

 

You claim that your objection is that being able to play Dark Side "isn't Star Wars," but the way your arguments read to me make it seem as though your issue is actually that the game glamorizes or rewards "evil," and you find that morally reprehensible.

[freeoftime]

Just to your first point. I think people often mistake people with "emotional" issues as being mentally ill. Yesterday I took a class taught by Dale Yeager, one of only 60 certified Criminal behavior Analysts in the Country. He spoke about Sociopaths and Psychopaths (yes in Criminal Forensics they are different...in his words The DSM-V is written by people overly concerned with politics and billing hours, they need to stay away from calling themselves experts when it comes to Criminal Cases.)

 

Regarding the Sociopath and/or Psychopath he said...

 

 

 

I think this sums up a Darkside Sith Lord pretty well, don't you?

 

So because one dude who's an expert at criminal behavior we're just gonna redefine what mentally ill means?

 

It's not gonna happen. Even if you wanted to change it now, it's not gonna happen, you won't get that to become popular enough to make mentally ill change its current meaning. Even if you somehow did eventually get there? Chances are you end up having thrown all the people who are currently called mentally ill and who would...what, be called "people with emotional issues" then? under the bus.

 

I mean, look , I'm not making this mentally ill stuff up. I'm professionally diagnosed by a psychiatrist as mentally ill, specifically as having severe anxiety issues. Yeah, that's an emotional problem (though in my case it's likely my nervous system is actually more susceptible to stress -- feeling it more severely and needing less stimulation for me to become stressed out), but that *is* what is currently seen and defined as mentally ill, regardless of what you or this particular expert thinks of the DSM-V. I'm in therapy for it because I literally have trouble to function normally in day to day life. Social interactions are terrifying. Sometimes just thinking off them almost has me panicking. Sometimes I'm just sitting in my room and am suddenly severely anxious for no apparent reason. (And that's not even going into my other issues like the abysmal low self worth.)

 

So, regardless of what this person says, the commonly accepted definition of "mentally ill" includes people like me, and people with depression, with bpd, with ptsd, people with all kinds of disorders who may never in their whole life hurt someone else and who are still likely to be victims of violence and abuse because of their disorders. And equating mentally ill with being a criminal or violent behaviour is feeding into the attitude society has towards mentally ill and neurodivergent people that causes this. Like, I'm not saying because he said that he's gonna attack a mentally ill person or thinks everyone who is mentally ill is violent, but it still feeds into it, you know?

 

EDIT: I mean, I see your point re: what this expert says and how similar it sounds to the Sith, but making these sweeping statements just saying someone is violent = someone is mentally ill does not sit right with me for all the reasons I said here.

 

 

ANYWAY that tangent done with, yes the Sith are awful but the themes in the OP are imho still served better by having being dark side actually possible.

Edited May 13, 2015 by freeoftime

[Ghisallo]

So because one dude who's an expert at criminal behavior we're just gonna redefine what mentally ill means?

 

It's not gonna happen. Even if you wanted to change it now, it's not gonna happen, you won't get that to become popular enough to make mentally ill change its current meaning. Even if you somehow did eventually get there? Chances are you end up having thrown all the people who are currently called mentally ill and who would...what, be called "people with emotional issues" then? under the bus.

 

I mean, look , I'm not making this mentally ill stuff up. I'm professionally diagnosed by a psychiatrist as mentally ill, specifically as having severe anxiety issues. Yeah, that's an emotional problem (though in my case it's likely my nervous system is actually more susceptible to stress -- feeling it more severely and needing less stimulation for me to become stressed out), but that *is* what is currently seen and defined as mentally ill, regardless of what you or this particular expert thinks of the DSM-V. I'm in therapy for it because I literally have trouble to function normally in day to day life. Social interactions are terrifying. Sometimes just thinking off them almost has me panicking. Sometimes I'm just sitting in my room and am suddenly severely anxious for no apparent reason. (And that's not even going into my other issues like the abysmal low self worth.)

 

So, regardless of what this person says, the commonly accepted definition of "mentally ill" includes people like me, and people with depression, with bpd, with ptsd, people with all kinds of disorders who may never in their whole life hurt someone else and who are still likely to be victims of violence and abuse because of their disorders. And equating mentally ill with being a criminal or violent behaviour is feeding into the attitude society has towards mentally ill and neurodivergent people that causes this. Like, I'm not saying because he said that he's gonna attack a mentally ill person or thinks everyone who is mentally ill is violent, but it still feeds into it, you know?

 

EDIT: I mean, I see your point re: what this expert says and how similar it sounds to the Sith, but making these sweeping statements just saying someone is violent = someone is mentally ill does not sit right with me for all the reasons I said here.

 

 

ANYWAY that tangent done with, yes the Sith are awful but the themes in the OP are imho still served better by having being dark side actually possible.

 

No...you completely do not understand what I wrote, or I wrote it poorly. MOST PEOPLE think "mentally ill" means not knowing the difference between right and wrong, dellusional etc. stuff like that.

 

Emotional imbalances (depression, anti-social personality disorder etc) are still a form of mental illness BUT using the slightly different terminology allows the layman to tell the difference better. Sorry if I did not explain well.

Edited May 13, 2015 by Ghisallo

[SelinaH]

No...you completely do not understand what I wrote...MOST PEOPLE think "mentally ill" means not knowing the difference between right and wrong.

 

Emotional imbalances (depression, bi-polar disorder etc) are still a form of mental illness BUT using the slightly different terminology allows the layman to tell the difference better. Sorry if I did not explain well.

The typical layman doesn't understand the difference between schizophrenia and DID, or between psychopathy and psychosis, either.

 

Changing any of that is going to be an uphill climb.

[Ghisallo]

The typical layman doesn't understand the difference between schizophrenia and DID, or between psychopathy and psychosis, either.

 

Changing any of that is going to be an uphill climb.

 

For the purposes of a discussion... NOT the purpose of professional definition.. so the layman doesn't get confused /facepalm

 

The bit about Sociopath/Psychopath is actually what the FBI teaches. There is a difference between how you make a criminal profile and a diagnosis in the office.

Edited May 14, 2015 by Ghisallo

[gothshark]

Just to your first point. I think people often mistake people with more so "emotional" issues as being mentally ill and when they think mentally ill they are thinking meeting the definition of criminal insanity.

 

Yesterday I took a class taught by Dale Yeager, one of only 60 certified Criminal behavior Analysts in the Country. He spoke about Sociopaths and Psychopaths (yes in Criminal Forensics they are different...in his words The DSM-V is written by people overly concerned with politics and billing hours, they need to stay away from calling themselves experts when it comes to Criminal Cases.)

 

Regarding the Sociopath and/or Psychopath he said...

 

 

 

I think this sums up a Darkside Sith Lord pretty well, don't you?

 

As a psychology student, I understand the difference between Criminal behavior Analysts, and Physiologists. Psychopathy and Sociopaths are not counted as Mental Illness, they are counted as Personality Defects. A person who has a personality defect or disorder does not suffer from an illness, as such there is no cure or reasonable treatment outside of just teaching them to follow certain guidelines.

 

Mental Illness implies something that can be treated and possibly cured.

 

I'll use the poorly written prequals as an example here.

 

Anakin Skywalker had a couple of personality defects which the actor played correctly, he was a narcissist, histrionic personality. Which is why he fell to the darkside, if the movies were better written his fall to evil happened not when Mace Windu confronted Palpatine but when he release his anger against the Sand people.

 

long story short, being evil is not mental illness, but a personality disorder.

[gothshark]

No...you completely do not understand what I wrote, or I wrote it poorly. MOST PEOPLE think "mentally ill" means not knowing the difference between right and wrong, dellusional etc. stuff like that.

 

Emotional imbalances (depression, anti-social personality disorder etc) are still a form of mental illness BUT using the slightly different terminology allows the layman to tell the difference better. Sorry if I did not explain well.

 

one correction, a personality disorder is not metal illness, it's a personality disorder.

[gothshark]

The typical layman doesn't understand the difference between schizophrenia and DID, or between psychopathy and psychosis, either.

 

Changing any of that is going to be an uphill climb.

 

schizophrenia and DID are mental illnesses, well schizophrenia is, dissociative identity disorder is actually a couple of things, and is glamorized as something else. But that is cutting edge mental health science.

 

psychosis is usually a Symptom of other things, and psychopathy is a personality defect.

[Ghisallo]

one correction, a personality disorder is not metal illness, it's a personality disorder.

 

True but since a lot of people were arguing points I was too lazy to address I figured I would just say "in the DSM V I'll call it a mental illness" since clearly that is how they see it. Arguing it is something else would waste time. In another thread I tried to explain to a person how there is a difference between a Criminal profiler defining sociaopathy and psychopathy and a Psychatrist and got told I was wrong for two pages because "the DSM-V says they are the same."

 

We already saw what happened when I said that Sociopathy and Psychopathy were different... someone basically raged I was wrong and it's not worth the argument to me. /shrug

 

But thank you for pointing it out again with better clarity than I did the first time.

Edited May 14, 2015 by Ghisallo

[freeoftime]

True but since a lot of people were arguing points I was too lazy to address I figured I would just say "in the DSM V I'll call it a mental illness." We already saw what happened when I said that Sociopathy and Psychopathy were different... someone basically raged I was wrong and it's not worth the argument to me. /shrug

 

But thank you for pointing it out again with better clarity than I did the first time.

 

Lmao I didn't rage.

 

I might have misunderstood you and re reading your initial post I can see what you mean (in fact, I did partially misunderstand you! You can disregard that whole bit about wanting to change definitions, I somehow read that as "anxiety, depression etc" are emotional issues and not mental illness. Welp. Way to go, self. EDIT: Actually I never saw your edit where you clarified it and responded to the much more ambiguously worded original post... Hmm.) but I was responding to someone who specifically called the Sith mentally ill for being violent. Probably because they were indeed thinking the way you pointed out, but that doesn't mean it shouldn't be said that, well, mentally ill does *not* mean being violent, despite common misconceptions

 

Like, I'm not sure how saying "what that person thinks of as mental illness is a common misunderstanding re: criminal behaviour and mental illnesses" somehow goes against my very initial point of not equating being mentally ill with being violent if we're not defining the behaviour the Sith exhibit (correctly, I assume) as personality defects.

 

I mean, I did misunderstand you and I'm sorry for that (though I don't appreciate the "raging" comment tbqh), but now I'm.... not even really sure what you're arguing.

Edited May 14, 2015 by freeoftime

[Ghisallo]

Lmao I didn't rage.

 

I might have misunderstood you and re reading your initial post I can see what you mean (in fact, I did partially misunderstand you! You can disregard that whole bit about wanting to change definitions, I somehow read that as "anxiety, depression etc" are emotional issues and not mental illness. Welp. Way to go, self.) but I was responding to someone who specifically called the Sith mentally ill for being violent. Probably because they were indeed thinking the way you pointed out, but that doesn't mean it shouldn't be said that, well, mentally ill does *not* mean being violent, despite common misconceptions

 

Like, I'm not sure how saying "what that person thinks of as mental illness is a common misunderstanding re: criminal behaviour and mental illnesses" somehow goes against my very initial point of not equating being mentally ill with being violent if we're not defining the behaviour the Sith exhibit (correctly, I assume) as personality defects.

 

I mean, I did misunderstand you and I'm sorry for that (though I don't appreciate the "raging" comment tbqh), but now I'm.... not even really sure what you're arguing.

 

All I was trying to do was explain they were just doing what 90% of the population does... use TV like Criminal Minds to say what mental illness is. Criminal Minds is a BAD TV show if you know about mental illness, personality disorders and Criminal Profiling.

 

Sometimes I tend to use too many words though and the point gets lost lol.

 

I also apologize for the raging bit. typing and doing an OPs run at the same time ... distracted.

Edited May 14, 2015 by Ghisallo

[gothshark]

Lmao I didn't rage.

 

I might have misunderstood you and re reading your initial post I can see what you mean (in fact, I did partially misunderstand you! You can disregard that whole bit about wanting to change definitions, I somehow read that as "anxiety, depression etc" are emotional issues and not mental illness. Welp. Way to go, self.) but I was responding to someone who specifically called the Sith mentally ill for being violent. Probably because they were indeed thinking the way you pointed out, but that doesn't mean it shouldn't be said that, well, mentally ill does *not* mean being violent, despite common misconceptions

 

Like, I'm not sure how saying "what that person thinks of as mental illness is a common misunderstanding re: criminal behaviour and mental illnesses" somehow goes against my very initial point of not equating being mentally ill with being violent if we're not defining the behaviour the Sith exhibit (correctly, I assume) as personality defects.

 

I mean, I did misunderstand you and I'm sorry for that (though I don't appreciate the "raging" comment tbqh), but now I'm.... not even really sure what you're arguing.

 

This brings me to an interesting thought, Dark Side Corruption, and being a dark force user, is that mental illness.

 

Under normal situations someone who counts as evil is usually a sociopath or a psychopath both of which are personality disorders and not mental illness, however since the connection to the force is contained inside bacterium called midichlorians which elevate a persons personality traits, while giving them space magic, and because a person can fall to the darkside and be redeemed, it would imply that Sith are actually infected by evil mind control bugs, which once again places the behavior into the realm of an illness which can be cured.

 

 

....

[Ghisallo]

This brings me to an interesting thought, Dark Side Corruption, and being a dark force user, is that mental illness.

 

Under normal situations someone who counts as evil is usually a sociopath or a psychopath both of which are personality disorders and not mental illness, however since the connection to the force is contained inside bacterium called midichlorians which elevate a persons personality traits, while giving them space magic, and because a person can fall to the darkside and be redeemed, it would imply that Sith are actually infected by evil mind control bugs, which once again places the behavior into the realm of an illness which can be cured.

 

 

....

 

See that isn't it. It is now shown in EU canon that the Force...and the midi-chlorians is NOT darkside or light side. In essence the Force simply "is". Light and Dark are what the living beings bring to it based on choice. The seduction of the dark side is essentially simply the seduction of the "easy path" intensified by the power of the force... I guess.

Edited May 14, 2015 by Ghisallo

[gothshark]

See that isn't it. It is now shown in EU canon that the Force...and the midi-chlorians is NOT darkside or light side. In essence the Force simply "is". Light and Dark are what the living beings bring to it based on choice.

 

You missed the joke. Seriously my post was funny, or should have come across that way, since I implied that penicillin would cure Dark Side behavior.

[freeoftime]

All I was trying to do was explain they were just doing what 90% of the population does... use TV like Criminal Minds to say what mental illness is. Criminal Minds is a BAD TV show if you know about mental illness, personality disorders and Criminal Profiling.

 

Sometimes I tend to use too many words though and the point gets lost lol.

 

I also apologize for the raging bit. typing and doing an OPs run at the same time ... distracted.

 

 

We can agree on that! So, basically a case of misunderstanding.

 

(And I know that's how they were using it, I just don't like it because I don't like the other misconceptions about mental illness that tend to come with it )

 

And apology accepted xD I am very sensitive lmao, and yes, multitasking muddies things.

 

And re: the Dark side being an illness... I don't think it is? The Force basically amounts to weird space magic even with the pseudo scientific explanation with those midichlorians and this... muddies things a bit too much for my taste? Like, there's no real world equivalent to weird space magic caused by weird bacteria and using mental illness as that doesn't strike me as right.

 

Though the way the dark side is described to work it sometimes almost does sound like some kind of evil will that brainwashes people into being bad, like when Bastila talks about Revan's and Malak's corruption. (And then those two turn out to be actually brainwashed/mind controlled in some form by Vitiate. Hah.) No wonder Kreia wanted to destroy it 8'D Idk, I wish they'd make up their minds about the specifics and explained it in detail. Sometimes being corrupted by the dark side sounds like falling victim to something, sometimes it's just being an evil douchebag.

 

EDIT: .....And apparently I keep getting people wrong today oops. But seriously the ds thing legit bugs me like how does it actually *work* now.

Edited May 14, 2015 by freeoftime

[Ghisallo]

You missed the joke. Seriously my post was funny, or should have come across that way, since I implied that penicillin would cure Dark Side behavior.

 

I just HATE midi-chlorians lol

[DarthDymond]

See that isn't it. It is now shown in EU canon that the Force...and the midi-chlorians is NOT darkside or light side. In essence the Force simply "is". Light and Dark are what the living beings bring to it based on choice. The seduction of the dark side is essentially simply the seduction of the "easy path" intensified by the power of the force... I guess.

Then they retconned that Little Miss "everything I tell you is a lie" Vergere was a Sith all along and therefore that was all a load of poo-doo to get Jacen to fall to the Dark Side.

 

Which actually brings things back around to the OP's claims about what is and isn't "Star Wars" - since that retcon always came across as a move based on the idea that "Star Wars EU is getting too morally relativistic, Star Wars was originally about straight forward good vs evil - we need to move things back in that direction"

Edited May 14, 2015 by DarthDymond

[SelinaH]

For the purposes of a discussion... NOT the purpose of professional definition.. so the layman doesn't get confused /facepalm

 

The bit about Sociopath/Psychopath is actually what the FBI teaches. There is a difference between how you make a criminal profile and a diagnosis in the office.

Oh, I wasn't talking about changing the definitions in the DSM-x, either. I simply meant that people often have a hard time assimilating new data that contradict what might already be in their heads.

 

I think it's easiest for most people to absorb whatever information -- misguided or not -- they glean from their favorite TV shows.

[Ghisallo]

We can agree on that! So, basically a case of misunderstanding.

 

(And I know that's how they were using it, I just don't like it because I don't like the other misconceptions about mental illness that tend to come with it )

 

And apology accepted xD I am very sensitive lmao, and yes, multitasking muddies things.

 

And re: the Dark side being an illness... I don't think it is? The Force basically amounts to weird space magic even with the pseudo scientific explanation with those midichlorians and this... muddies things a bit too much for my taste? Like, there's no real world equivalent to weird space magic caused by weird bacteria and using mental illness as that doesn't strike me as right.

 

Though the way the dark side is described to work it sometimes almost does sound like some kind of evil will that brainwashes people into being bad, like when Bastila talks about Revan's and Malak's corruption. (And then those two turn out to be actually brainwashed/mind controlled in some form by Vitiate. Hah.) No wonder Kreia wanted to destroy it 8'D Idk, I wish they'd make up their minds about the specifics and explained it in detail. Sometimes being corrupted by the dark side sounds like falling victim to something, sometimes it's just being an evil douchebag.

 

EDIT: .....And apparently I keep getting people wrong today oops. But seriously the ds thing legit bugs me like how does it actually *work* now.

 

Well basically this (on your last point). The Force is simply the force. Light and dark must be in balance or bad things happen. Think Michael Moorcock and the Eternal Champion Books... Order and Chaos if one becomes paramount everything breaks down.

 

What is seductive about the darkside is that you get power quickly and it is easier... you can give in to your emotions. And like anything the further along a path you go you build a habit? It's just because it is "Force" related I guess you could say it becomes more of an additction... the RUSH of channeling those strong emotions. Think of an adrenalin junkie on steroids... at least thats how I break it down into the "simple" version.

[gothshark]

Then they retconned that Little Miss "everything I tell you is a lie" Vergere was a Sith all along and therefore that was all a load of poo-doo to get Jacen to fall to the Dark Side.

 

Which actually brings things back around to the OP's claims about what is and isn't "Star Wars" - since that retcon always came across as a move based on the idea that "Star Wars EU is getting too morally relativistic, Star Wars was originally about straight forward good vs evil - we need to move things back in that direction"

 

You see, I think that is hog wash, when you look at what Lucas wrote you will realize he was preaching Doaism in his description of the force, He envisioned pure good and pure evil, and only normal people could be balanced and grey. The problem hits, when you realize that Lucas didn't understand good and evil to start with. The Jedi in the prequals were not good aligned by any definition, and the people who were evil didn't act evil at all.

 

What it ended up being:

Technology, Totalitarian, passion = Evil

calm, restful, natural = Good

 

Which causes a huge moral problem, under most definitions of good the word used is morality based on belief, Lucas reinforces this concept of good and evil based on a mix of 'Modern Hippism' as good, and Corporate Entities as evil.

 

While not placing a moral compass on compassion, selflessness and selfishness. Although Anakin states that line, it is clear he remained selfless in motivation even after falling to the darkside, and from everything the Emperor does it is clear he actually wants to establish order and stability which are signs of selflessness.

[SelinaH]

Which actually brings things back around to the OP's claims about what is and isn't "Star Wars" - since that retcon always came across as a move based on the idea that "Star Wars EU is getting too morally relativistic, Star Wars was originally about straight forward good vs evil - we need to move things back in that direction"

Of course, when Episode IV was originally released we had Han shooting. Period. No Greedo firing and missing, forcing his hand.

 

I guess that was too morally relativistic for some people.

[DarthDymond]

Of course, when Episode IV was originally released we had Han shooting. Period. No Greedo firing and missing, forcing his hand.

 

I guess that was too morally relativistic for some people.

Apparently.

 

"Han is going to go on a character arc where he goes from being a self-interested rogue to showing himself as a true hero."

"Okay! Great! Love it! ...Except for that 'rogue' part, can we do without that? Don't want people getting mixed messages."

[freeoftime]

Well basically this (on your last point). The Force is simply the force. Light and dark must be in balance or bad things happen. Think Michael Moorcock and the Eternal Champion Books... Order and Chaos if one becomes paramount everything breaks down.

 

What is seductive about the darkside is that you get power quickly and it is easier... you can give in to your emotions. And like anything the further along a path you go you build a habit? It's just because it is "Force" related I guess you could say it becomes more of an additction... the RUSH of channeling those strong emotions. Think of an adrenalin junkie on steroids... at least thats how I break it down into the "simple" version.

 

That's how usually understand it usually as well, but then there's things like KOTOR, where Bastila describes the dark side to the PC as preying on Jedi/force sensitives and twisting their minds until formerly good people are capable or horrible things (iirc she was specifically mentioning Revan and Malak in that context. Yet, no one ever shows either much sympathy? I mean, I know what they've done was horrible and no one knew about Vitiate screwing with their minds, but if that's how the dark side works, it would have made them victims of it as well...)

 

It's reinforced by Carth who ends up under the same impression that the dark side seems to be some kind of evil preying on force sensitives rather than merely being a fancy name for greed and corruption like he'd previously thought, though admittedly he isn't particularly informed about the matter.

 

And IIRC the Sith species are mentioned as being naturals at the dark side?

 

In general, I'd say your version makes more sense and works better from a moral point of view, but it's weird :| like they can't quite make up their mind what exactly the dark side is and what happens when someone falls.