[Sh Ranger]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kamen Rider Die

It is so weird to hear this description of the Ikki/Daiji conflict, because we as fans should already have a grounding for what each character is saying -- this is 100% the Kento/Touma debate from the end of Saber. Like, 1000%. Daiji is saying that the only hope lies in doing something morally reprehensible, but the "heroes" are selfishly standing in his way; while Ikki is saying that a) what everyone else is doing is noticeably working, and b) there's no point to winning if victory is a choice between two horrible outcomes. Like, this is just the end of Saber! Which is a different problem, sure, but I don't remember people being as down on the end of Saber as they are on the end of Revice?

I think this is an unfair comparison for Kento, who at least checked Kurayami's despair visions to see if he could save everybody, before succumbing to the lonely path of Calibur. Furthermore, his ultimate goal had not changed, as he and Touma were both fighting the same enemy. It's one book with two writers, envisioning the same conclusion but with two different journeys to reach it.

Ikki and Daiji are not writing the same book, barely even the same genre. Ikki opposes Gif to protect people. Daiji sides with Gif to protect cattle. And for what? Daiji does not have any convenient excuse of despair-inducing clairvoyance, so his claim that his actions are "justice" isn't at all plausible and only makes him look like a self-righteous coward who would bend the knee to Gif after a little loss streak.