So here's an interesting question I don't think has come up yet.

It's said war - war never changes. Men/Women do, through the roads they walk.

Exactly. Your experiences make you who you are. So how did the experiences of the Mojave change you? What was your outlook going into the Mojave vs. what your final decision was? Did it change? Remain the same? Did you support the same group, but for entirely different reasons? Did you support a different group for the reasons you once supported another, initially believing the first group did it better? Let's hear what roads you walked.

Personally? At the start of my New Vegas experience, I supported House 100%. I never understood why most people supported the NCR when House was clearly smarter and better qualified than any other candidate. I liked the idea of a third nation arising so that people themselves got a chance to choose between three options of how they'd like to live. I also believed that in the Post-apocalyptic world, even only a select few getting to live in the lap of luxury was a blessing, as the alternative is that EVERYONE live in a very dangerous, unforgiving wasteland.

Over time though, I sort of began to recognize the one thing House was rather poor at providing people: happiness. For all the luxuries and technology he offered, the Strip is a very cold, self-interested culture that doesn't do much beyond try to make money. It's all work and no play. More importantly, Vault 21, which was described as a utopia of human equality, died by House's hand. He was so fixated on his own way of life and his own philosophy that he's unable to recognize the strengths of others: there was absolutely nothing wrong with Vault 21 and no reason to destroy it as he did, an entire tribe being reduced to nothing but a small team of employees for his regime.

I'm not one to believe in revenge for the sake of revenge, so commentary about how House killed a lot of people when he initially established the Strip didn't phase me. Yes it's inexcuseable, but nothing can be done for those people now; they're dead. However, what finally got to me was simple: the King. The King is a guy with, in my opinion, a wonderful yet simplistic philosophy about human respect. The Kings believe in freedom at all costs and only interfere in people's lives should someone fail to show respect for others, which develops into the Kings effectively providing a police force for the community. For all that House lacks subjectively, the King provides. And unfortunately, once again, House's single-minded mentality, focus and belief in his own philosophies and disrespect for that of others is what endangers the King.

So I began to weigh the two and ask myself which person I found more important (including Elizabeth Kieran, as for as "unimportant" as she is, she's undeniably 100% innocent and a good human being that you're basically murdering if you wish to have both survive, and I'm not sure I agreed with killing off an innocent because "someone else is more important than you."), and eventually decided that history has shown that no amount of technological progress will mean jack all if people haven't learned the philosophy of basic human respect; yes, I consider the King more valuable to society than House, and no, I don't think killing an innocent to allow them both to exist (and with the Kings effectively existing under House's terms) is a good idea; simply doesn't sit right with me. For those reasons, I concluded with Indy, deciding that for better or worse, the people of the Mojave have earned the right and deserve a shot at determining their own future. I want to see if the King's philosophy can flourish and expand for the greater good of the people; it at least deserves a chance.