Talk:Darko Brevic

Which War?
Okay,yet another nitpick.I saw that it says He was in the Yugoslav wars. Isn't it the Bosnian war?Cuz that's what it used to say,and it's really confusing me. HuangLee 21:38, 21 January 2009 (UTC)


 * The Bosnian War was a part of the Yugoslav Wars. Dan the Man 1983 23:18, September 22, 2009 (UTC)


 * I believe it should be labeled as Bosnian War because there were multiple wars in the Yugoslav wars like the Croatian War Of Independence, the War In Slovenia, and the Bosnian War. Darko did not fight in all these wars just the Bosnian War. (Stebner603 18:59, January 27, 2010 (UTC))

Antagonist
He was a helpless slave to an addiction and turned out to not really be evil. He was even slightly justified, reflecting on all the murders Niko and their old squad had committed in comparison. All that taken into account, does he really count as an antagonist? --Mateo22 21:30, July 22, 2010 (UTC)


 * After all the trouble and drama he caused Niko, I'd say yes Casecr 12:20, April 24, 2011 (UTC)


 * I say no. I don't believe Darko is an antagonist. Darko was a drug addict and Goran killed his neighbours. He had reason not to like the squad.


 * Yes, Darko did some bad things. So did Niko. Let's not forget that Niko is a murderer and throughout the story kills much more than 14, sometimes with no charge.


 * Darko, by his own admission, made a mistake. He shows that he regrets what he did and would be happier dead. There is no way you can call Darko a "good" guy, nor a "bad" guy.


 * Sláinte mhaith! - Hobbes  (  Talk  ) 12:56, April 24, 2011 (UTC)


 * But Niko spends half the game trying to find him, and that kind of is the definition of Antagonist, someone who the protagonist hates or is looking for, so I'd count him as an antagonist due to the amount of time Niko spends trying to find him
 * Level80Duckfish 20:43, October 28, 2011 (UTC)Level80Duckfish

Age
Who said he was 33? Nicolas112411 03:46, August 6, 2010 (UTC)

More than a central character?
I think Darko is more than a central character. Without Darko, there would be no plot support. Lets not forget Darko is the entire reason Niko moved to Liberty City. Now let me quote "The Cousins Bellic" here, so I don't get that one guy on the internet that always makes responses like: No, there's another reason why Niko moved, in the Cousins Bellic Roman says: "And to see your cousin, of course." to which Niko re-assures him this. Sorry if that was worded confusingly, couldn't think of a different way. Either way, I think Darko should be the Primary Antagonist for past events. Dimitri indeed would be the primary antagonist in terms of present day plot, but a lot of GTA IV is supported on what has happened in the past, Darko playing a big role on the past. Same with Ray Bulgarin, as he was involved in a lot of Niko's past life as well. I'm sorry if this is very confusing, I just hope someone can understand what I'm trying to say, I can't think of a different way to word this right now. -aarondude5 8.19.14 5:01 P.M. EST

Romania?
Where in the game does it specifically mention that he hid out in Romania, or he was born in 1975?
 * LCPD Database, if he has an entry? I haven't played IV for a while and my computer is currently bust so I can't check. During Weekend at Florian's Florian claims he heard Darko was still living in "Europe, or Switzerland, or somewhere" so maybe someone took the "somewhere" to be Romania (quite how, I don't know). It seems a strangely specific thing to try and falsify, but I'm sure someone will be able to check at some point.

EDIT: Looking through the history, the piece about him fleeing to Bucharest first appeared c.2008, so someone must have got it from somewhere, and his age has previously ranged from 30-33 (before being deleted by another user for being "bullshit"). Regarding the bit about Bucharest, these things can sometimes crop up during friend activities. Sam Talk 12:23, September 18, 2016 (UTC)

Is Darko's final status "Unknown" if you spare him?
He was in deep depression and all that. Do you think that this might cause his fate afterwards to become a mystery?
 * Doesn't matter what we "think". We list what we know... if you spare him, he is last seen alive and if you kill him, he's dead. Therefore "Determinant" is the correct fate. Smurfy: illuminate - communicate - spectate 02:04, February 20, 2018 (UTC)


 * But can we say that his status thereafter is unknown?Ehcanadian992 (talk) 02:23, February 20, 2018 (UTC)
 * No. Smurfy: illuminate - communicate - spectate 02:25, February 20, 2018 (UTC)