They didn't exactly choose to rewrite reality. It just sort of happened around them. If you suddenly woke up in paradise, would you honestly try to stop and figure out how to get back to the real world?
They had no real way of knowing what happened. They certainly had no way of knowing that it had a cost to others (if indeed it did). Marche could very easily be the one refusing to face the fact that reality is simply not as stable as we might like to believe, at least early on in the story.
But all of this still just boils down to "it's the right thing to do". What is his reason for turning himself into the judges and trying to save the people of Muscadet? Does he know that it will get him access to Exodus? No. Does he know that he won't remain in prison forever and never get his friends back to St. Ivalice? No. He just knows that letting a village get enslaved and imprisoned because he chose to buck the system is wrong.
Well, actually, there is almost no one who could have told him the history of Alchemy in a way that would have made any difference. Everyone except Hydros and Lunpa thought Alchemy would result in the end of the world. Even Kraden wanted to bring back Alchemy, not to save the world, but to save Babi. So even if Isaac had asked about the history of Alchemy (or, as the game implies, just listened to the lectures at Sol Sanctum), he wouldn't have come to any other conclusions.He's boring and prediuctable. I felt like I was watching a Saturday moning cartoon show which have those cheesy moral lesson scenes at the end. Anytime something was in trouble he would sidestep his quest to help out. The best part about the game was discovering that he doomed the world in the end because he never stopped to really ask anyone about the history of Alchemy and instead just did as he was told.Yes, heaven forbid we have a character in a game who isn't just an asshole for the sake of being an asshole.
What's more, we actually know from game canon that the world is equally doomed if Isaac does nothing. Whether because Saturos and Menardi would have failed to ignite Jupiter and Mars, or whether they or Alex would have led the world into a disaster that would have consumed the world, we know that everything ends if Isaac gives up.
You think Isaac is boring because he helps people. I find it pleasantly refreshing amongst all the psychotic jerks in the gaming industries these days. I find the "edgy dark antihero" trope that is dominating the market to be far more boring.
There are tons of reasons for Isaac to help people. Heck, he's basically an ambassador of magic to people who are completely mundane. And he's following in the footsteps of some magicians who go around absolutely destroying everything they come across. It's like someone following Magneto and trying to convince people that all mutants aren't bad. Maybe helping rescue some livelihoods will help.
Isaac is a silent protagonist. We don't get to see a lot of direct characterization. That's why I actually adore the way the two games demonstrate characterization. Neither Isaac nor Felix speak in their respective games. Yet you can still get a great insight into what sort of people they are, where they place their priorities, and what they value just from how the games play out. For being a silent protagonist, you get a surprising amount of depth in Isaac's character.There is nothing wrong with being good, I just prefer characterization with it. Marche does what he must because he is trying to save his home and his friends, Ramza fights the cause of the war because he witnesses first hand its horrors in the early chapters. The main characters of all the Suikoden games are inspired to save their homes because of loss, national pride, or to end suffering they have seen first hand.Is there anything wrong with wanting to help people out? With attempting to do a little more than just laugh at the misfortune of others as you walk by? With carrying power far beyond that of 99% of the world's population and actually suint that power to make a difference where you can?
Isaac? Is a nice kid who was in the wrong place, gets orderd to save the world and does it. Where his raison d'etre? To give this a Final Fantasy spin, Cecil vs. Bartz, Bartz goes along with saving the world because he's a nice guy who was in the wrong place at the wrong time, and ultimately resigns himself to destiny due to a late game plot revelation that his father was a Dawn Warrior. His reasoning is shallow. Cecil did some bad things and it was his cowardice and in ability to stand up to his beliefs that led to suffering. He is compelled to do good because he no longer wants to be the man he was yesterday. His desire is manifested with his class change to Paladin and even though he fails he always picks himself back up and goes on. It is far more inspiring than Bartz. We strive to be Bartz but we all know we're more like Cecil, we all have a moment in our lives where we faltered to weakness instead of taking the high road.
In Golden Sun, there's a part where you encounter some people near the river who have been transformed into trees. After you fight off the villains, they push the people over, and one of them is dangerously close to falling into the river. All you have to do is take two steps out of your way to use your Psynergy to rescue the person.That's a little uncalled for, you fail to try and understand my perspective. I simply need to understand where the character is coming from. Doing good for selfish reasons is not inherently wrong, maybe people do good because we enjoy it and it makes us feel good which itself is enough of a reason. Selfishness is not a bad trait in small doses and like Thomas Hobbes, I feel it is the basis for all morality.So just because you are a complete ass who feels no compassion for others and no reason to help when you can, that makes those who do bad characters? I'm apparently not human because I enjoy helping people. I go out of my way to assist those in trouble, to carry burdens, help people get around, etcetera. And if I was one of only dozens of people in the world capable of using magic, I'd do a hell of a lot more.
Basically the issue I have here is that writing a traditionally morally good character is too easy. They are just like that and there is no reason needed to understand them. An asshole is different, we always find out why they are the way they are and most of the times events in the story will lead them back to being a bit of a more nice guy. There is nowhere to grow for upstanding people. It's why most people prefer the second Golden Sun game cause Felix is a more complex hero willing to side with some unsavory people to save the world whereas Isaac is pretty much a flat character overall. You can write a compelling morally righteous character (see Cecil, Ramza, Marche, etc...) but I often find most writers are lazy with these type of characters which is why I don't feel many RPG fans like myself enjoy them.
Or you could just walk on by, and then you later find out that one of them got washed away by the river and drowned. Because you didn't feel like being a goody two shoes.
So, yeah, if you can't sympathize with the person with magic actually taking two seconds to save someone's life just because he feels it's the right thing to do, I kind of think you're a jerk.