Karma Systems

[IamSofaKingRaw]

Okay so we are at an age in gaming where karma systems are being put into most adventure RPG type games to make the gamer feel like they are controlling the outcome of the story.

I recently took a look at the InFamous 2 thread on the karma system and was deeply aggravated reading all the "wow karma systems are so bad, its always be Jesus or eat babies and skin puppies"

Now I know that the karma systems in games are far from perfect, but the way I see it, its nearly impossible for a developer to make any choice you make have an affect on something that would have an affect on something else etc.. The basic do good or evil is used because in all seriousness being neutral is not possible for the hero/protagonist you play. Do you think Cole can just not help anyone but not do anything bad to get what he wants? Do you think he could have tried to escape from the city at the beginning without fighting the cops guarding the gate. How could have he have been neutral? Talk to the cops?

I think to make karma systems better, games like Mass Effect and Infamous shouldn't tell you when a karma moment is occurring. The game could put that guy hanging from a pole surrounded by a mob somewhere on your path but it shouldn't be alerted to you. You should decide to do whatever you want.


My point of this is that karma systems can't really have a third option. Its either do right, or not.

 

[Ninjaghostdog]

I agree on that games should not tell you when karma events are happening, thats kind of the case in the kotor games you had to think if a peticular action was right or wrong. The only game I can think of which has a neutral standard is fable 2, even at the end there was a neutral option. I guess why most developers don't put neutral options in their games is becuase it can be boring, after all being the evil badass or awesome hero is very, very fun.

 

[Ninjaghostdog]

I agree on that games should not tell you when karma events are happening, thats kind of the case in the kotor games you had to think if a peticular action was right or wrong. The only game I can think of which has a neutral standard is fable 2, even at the end there was a neutral option. I guess why most developers don't put neutral options in their games is becuase it can be boring, after all being the evil badass or awesome hero is very, very fun.

 

[Ninjaghostdog]

Double post my bad. :\

 

[oplinger]

What I've always hated about Karma systems is they apply points to it. Knowing a karma event is happening, or seeing the karmic choices put right out in front of you, it doesn't bother me as much, some of them are really obvious. Applying points to it is what really shows off what the devs think is good or bad, you get more points for saving a burning orphanage then say, punching a guy unconscious to stop him from burning an orphanage.

It also causes people to stack up on points and learn what gets them better results, rather than just doing what they think is right.

Multiple options for good/bad karma would be nice too, as well as neutral choices, but...I guess doing that isn't cost effective <.<

 

[Outright Villainy]

I kind of hate Karma systems to be honest; irrelevant at best, obtrusive and restricting at worst.

Whilst New Vegas kept the ham handed Karma system from Fallout 3, I think they significantly improved it by

a) Having far less actions actually affect Karma
B) Place more emphasis on faction points.

Faction points are a much better system than simply being right or wrong. It's pretty to easy to guage if individuals/groups approve of your actions, without getting into morality.

Rather than have some omnipotent overlord watch your every mood and judge you accordingly, faction systems just show you how you're viewed in the eyes of different people, giving the meter both a sensical and practical value.

Karma meters are just bullshit, frankly.