There is something in video games that bothers me. And that is why we must almost always play the "good guys" or the "heroic freedom fighters". Obviously, there are exception to this rule, such as the GTA series, but all in all it is the general rule. And while I don't mind it....it bugs me that I don't even have the option to be the "bad guy", or use my own logic and feeling to decide who is good and bad.
Examples of this are numerous. Fallout 3 is a great game, I can't deny that. But why can't I be who I want to be? No matter what you do, you ultimatey *SPOLIERS* wind up helping the Brotherhood of Steel. What happens if I think they're wrong - what if I want the Enclave to win? I have the option to wipe the Enclave....but not the Brotherhood. Even the "neutral" path supports the Brotherhood. Why can't I simply act in the way I want, actually affecting the outcome of the game, and having to deal with the consequences? Why must I be funelled down the "good", "bad" or "neutrak" path?
Red Faction: Guerrilla is another example of this. While the game itself will undoubtably be great, it makes the same decision of making me some puny little "freedom fighter" against some big, oppresive government/police/corporation thingy. What about those of us who don't think he is a "freedom fighter"? What about those of us who think the "Red Faction" are just bunch of punk-ass snobs who deserve no mercy other then a quick curb stomp to the face? Why do we have to your idea of the "good guy"? Further, why make a game about destruction....and the make us be the faction that doesn't have the toys to actually make use of it? You can't have true destruction without tactical missile strikes people.
Some of the best times can be had in "Bad Guy" and "Gray" games where you're either the bad guy or allowed to make your own choices, and the world reacts. Crackdown was immensely fun and enjoyable for two reasons - because of the well-designed gameplay and (you'd know this if you finished the story) the fact that you're the law - you're the government, smacking down the crime and the people, causing copious amounts of colleteral damage along the way. Mass Effect is one of the best "gray" games to date, which gives you a gun, a mission, and sits on the sidelins drumming its fingers, waiting to see what you do. It doesn't judge you; it just lets you do you thing and tell you the results at the end. Even Fable II, a game about choices, shoehorns you at the end, sending you decidedly down one path or another.
I mean, I'm not against "good guy" games...but come on. Gives us a little wiggle room here devs - can't I be the guy who kidnaps the princess for once?
Examples of this are numerous. Fallout 3 is a great game, I can't deny that. But why can't I be who I want to be? No matter what you do, you ultimatey *SPOLIERS* wind up helping the Brotherhood of Steel. What happens if I think they're wrong - what if I want the Enclave to win? I have the option to wipe the Enclave....but not the Brotherhood. Even the "neutral" path supports the Brotherhood. Why can't I simply act in the way I want, actually affecting the outcome of the game, and having to deal with the consequences? Why must I be funelled down the "good", "bad" or "neutrak" path?
Red Faction: Guerrilla is another example of this. While the game itself will undoubtably be great, it makes the same decision of making me some puny little "freedom fighter" against some big, oppresive government/police/corporation thingy. What about those of us who don't think he is a "freedom fighter"? What about those of us who think the "Red Faction" are just bunch of punk-ass snobs who deserve no mercy other then a quick curb stomp to the face? Why do we have to your idea of the "good guy"? Further, why make a game about destruction....and the make us be the faction that doesn't have the toys to actually make use of it? You can't have true destruction without tactical missile strikes people.
Some of the best times can be had in "Bad Guy" and "Gray" games where you're either the bad guy or allowed to make your own choices, and the world reacts. Crackdown was immensely fun and enjoyable for two reasons - because of the well-designed gameplay and (you'd know this if you finished the story) the fact that you're the law - you're the government, smacking down the crime and the people, causing copious amounts of colleteral damage along the way. Mass Effect is one of the best "gray" games to date, which gives you a gun, a mission, and sits on the sidelins drumming its fingers, waiting to see what you do. It doesn't judge you; it just lets you do you thing and tell you the results at the end. Even Fable II, a game about choices, shoehorns you at the end, sending you decidedly down one path or another.
I mean, I'm not against "good guy" games...but come on. Gives us a little wiggle room here devs - can't I be the guy who kidnaps the princess for once?
