Get Rid of Morality Systems

[Soviet Heavy]

Alpha Protocol, best morality system ever.

The thing I liked about AP was how you had three flavours of Douchebag, so you could choose any response, and it would still seem consistent with your character.

 

[Biodeamon]

I could do without a morality system as long as i get to do moral choices. However it is fun to see how much of a jerk/paladin you are. However some games do well with morality systems like how charecters react towards you or what powers you unlock. however it does tick me off with Mass Effect 2 where you need to be complete jerk to be an even more jerk or vice versa.

 

[Onyx Oblivion]

I like what they did in the first dragon age where you weren't told what the good/bad action was and had to decide for yourself what to say

I was basically good. Except for the whole Dalish camp slaughter. And making deals with demons. And killing people for money.

Okay...Yeah. Dragon Age has great morality since I can do all of that on one characters and not be punished for basically towing the neutral line.

 

[Racecarlock]

Ok yahtzee, we all know it's you under that mask, quit dicking around and just admit it.

In all seriousness. I do agree to get rid of the morality system. Just replace it with a benefit/cost choice system. The needs of the few versus the needs of the many. These make for much much more interesting choices instead of "Oh, I'll go for the good option because it'll increase my goodosity and unlock the angel weapons".

 

[artanis_neravar]

Allow me to be a contrarian for a moment and present a way that moral systems might make sense. Lets look for a moment at Knights of the old republic and say you played the game making decisions that gave you light side points. Towards the end of the game you begin to see that certain actions or dialogue trees are absent or grayed out to you. These dialogue tree options and choices have to do with the exact opposite perspective from that you have established your player is based on your actions earlier in the game (as a light side hero you can no longer choose dark side actions). So basically, the game has prevented you from radically changing your characters personality based on your own decisions earlier in the game. Lets pretend that the original star wars trilogy was a very long game. At the end, there might be an option for luke to kill vader and fall to the dark side, kinda like in Kotor. But if you played through the game the exact way the movie went, it wouldn't make any sense story wise, or in other words within the narrative created by your choices earlier in the game, for that to happen.

Not true, you don't know whats going on in the characters head, maybe I've been playing nice until I am in the position to do the most damage, and in the original trilogy that would be about when Luke has the option to kill Vader. Imagine if at that moment Luke reveals his true self kills Vader and the emperor and takes over the empire.

 

[Avatar Roku]

Morality is too conceptual to be measured by stats and graphs

Which is why a system like the ME2 one doesn't work. I need X many points to pull Spectre authority over some dumbass? And only if I'm evil? Why not pull rank and get it without being a jackass?

I've heard it fan wanked to be that the bars measure your reputation. As in, do good actions, you get the reputation as a good guy, so people won't take you seriously if you threaten them, etc. Still stupid, though.

Alpha Protocol, best morality system ever.

The thing I liked about AP was how you had three flavours of Douchebag, so you could choose any response, and it would still seem consistent with your character.

not douche bag, ponce, and the morality system was fucking amazing. There's an amazing amount of different things that happen based on what you do.

If only the entire game had been polished, I feel like that would be the litmus test. It was such a good game.

 

[penguindude42]

Would all of you dorks b*tching about morality systems please play Ultima IV: Quest of the Avatar thus expiriancing(sp?) one that works!?

You'll win more favor points that way.

-TOM

 

[Avatar Roku]

Morality is too conceptual to be measured by stats and graphs

Which is why a system like the ME2 one doesn't work. I need X many points to pull Spectre authority over some dumbass? And only if I'm evil? Why not pull rank and get it without being a jackass?

I've heard it fan wanked to be that the bars measure your reputation. As in, do good actions, you get the reputation as a good guy, so people won't take you seriously if you threaten them, etc. Still stupid, though.

Alpha Protocol, best morality system ever.

The thing I liked about AP was how you had three flavours of Douchebag, so you could choose any response, and it would still seem consistent with your character.

not douche bag, ponce, and the morality system was fucking amazing. There's an amazing amount of different things that happen based on what you do.

If only the entire game had been polished, I feel like that would be the litmus test. It was such a good game.

God that game was so good though, and it was more polished than Oblivion and Fallout 3 IMO and those games get praise out the ass. I think it froze on me 2 twice, the rest was kinda iffy controls but I still got through it first play through recruit, no points in stealth.

Well, for me, it seemed quite unpolished. Froze all the time, laggy, etc. Now, some of that is that my computer is old, but not all of it. Still a fucking amazing game, regardless.

Also, no points in Stealth? I could never do that, I love sneaking too much. Power to you.

 

[Kevin Lyons]

I feel the game that most represents this is Fable 3. *SPOILERS* *BUT THE GAME HAS BEEN OUT FOR SO LONG THAT I DONT REALLY CARE* Once you become the king, you have to make all of these epic morality choices that decide the outcome of the kingdom blah blah blah. BUT the "GOOD" choices end up leading to the downfall of the kingdom while the "EVIL" choices lead to everyone being saved. Now how can that really work??

 

[Indecipherable]

The Morality system of ME2 is simply a replacement to putting skill points into Persuade/Intimidate. That in and of itself is a worthy goal; in every single RPG I've played I've felt is mandatory to 'max out' your conversational skills. When there is something so crucial that it is nigh-unto essential it simply becomes a point sink in one form or another and I applaud attempts to get rid of it. However, ME2 didn't do it the right way.

The way I originally felt Paragon/Renegade to be was that the Paragon upheld every individuals rights, for better or worse, while the Renegade upheld a 'greater good', possibly at the expense of an individual. A Paragon might occaisionally suffer a greater loss than the Renegade because the bigger picture was greater than an individual's. Likewise a Renegade might sometimes sacrifice the life/freedom of innocents in order to maintain the prosperity of the system as a whole. It was not a simple dichotomy of Good/Bad. Unfortunately Renegade became synonymous with asshat bully who goes around and intimidates people, often for no practical purpose other than to show how big a jerk he can be to the whole galaxy. Gone is the Utilitarian Shepherd ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Utilitarian ) and now there's just Angry Shepherd.

Perhaps the removal of Persuade/Intimidate skills as a whole is the best way forwards, and leave fully fledged dialog choices to decide what happens. By that I mean having the entire sentence written out that Shepherd is to say and provide a meaningful number of responses, instead of obscure abbreviations down to things like 'Okay' that end up with you somehow punching a pregnant woman in the stomach. When you say the right thing you simply get the right outcome, it isn't influenced by a stat that you have been pumping up in the background.

 

[Kahunaburger]

Fallout New Vegas was the best in moral choice I've played so far. The actual karma meter does almost nothing in this game, the reputation meter is far more important.

^^This. You know Fallout New Vegas is doin it rite when you see arguments online about whether, for instance, the Legion's brand of dictatorship is justified as an alternative to anarchy or whether the NCR's democracy will have traction. That's heavy-duty discussion for a video game, or really for any similar conflict portrayed in a visual medium. Of course, it makes the Karma system completely superfluous and actively counterproductive to the black and grey morality they're trying to set up.

I just finished the Witcher, and I really like how that handles moral choice by not giving you choices that conveniently break down into good/evil. For instance

Spoiler

you have to choose between an authoritarian or permissive parenting style (Geralt's basically a terrible father figure no matter what) which in turn affects who one of the villains grows up to be.

It basically just gives you choices, results, and lets you decide whether you did the right thing.

In general, I tend to prefer morality systems that are ambiguous haha, but Planescape Torment also gets a shout-out for giving you the ability to play an evil character that doesn't veer into Stupid Evil.

 

[Kahunaburger]

The way I originally felt Paragon/Renegade to be was that the Paragon upheld every individuals rights, for better or worse, while the Renegade upheld a 'greater good', possibly at the expense of an individual. A Paragon might occaisionally suffer a greater loss than the Renegade because the bigger picture was greater than an individual's. Likewise a Renegade might sometimes sacrifice the life/freedom of innocents in order to maintain the prosperity of the system as a whole. It was not a simple dichotomy of Good/Bad. Unfortunately Renegade became synonymous with asshat bully who goes around and intimidates people, often for no practical purpose other than to show how big a jerk he can be to the whole galaxy. Gone is the Utilitarian Shepherd ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Utilitarian ) and now there's just Angry Shepherd.

Haha I've noticed Bioware tends to do this. See also: Closed Fist, and Morrigan Disapproves -10.

 

[Jumplion]

Yes, please, I am so tired of these stupid dichotomous morality systems. Mass Effect would have been an infinitely better game if it had no morality system and just let you choose the options you wanted. Literally just remove the system of "Paragon/Renegade", keep everything else in, and it would have been so much better.

 

[Grospoliner]

The problem is that real moral choices require multiple paths to be written. As in a real world scenario a single choice results in a long sequence of following events. Game makers avoid having to write a huge number of diverging paths by using the cheap moral bar cop-out. Most games, in their current incarnations, would never support diverging story paths due to linear level design. To some extent multiple scenarios can be performed using the same set pieces and even retaining the same linear plot (such as Fallout does) but alerting the story's internal dialogue.

 

[RedEyesBlackGamer]

I like what they did in the first dragon age where you weren't told what the good/bad action was and had to decide for yourself what to say

I was basically good. Except for the whole Dalish camp slaughter.

Who could pass up an army of werewolves?
OP: Games like ME would be a lot better without that stupid "good/douche" system. And the dialog wheel. But that is a rant for another day.

 

[SoulSalmon]

No.
Do NOT get rid of morality systems, just work on one that doesn't suck.
I hate seeing an idea with potential get executed so badly every single time that people call for it to be obliterated

We really just need an extensive morality system with proper support for grey areas. Won't be easy to make, but if done properly you might be looking at game of the year.