Moral complexity in games (bioware games in particular)
- Thread starter ExaltedK9
- Start date
The Heel Turn Face is a common enough trope to be considered cliche. It's the classic fall-back for uninspired writers who try to add complexity to a bland villain.
I can get what you are saying with Mass Effect, but Dragon Age? You were trying to play egalitarian out of your own free will. Some people play at game under a "screw what you think; I'm going with my gut" viewpoint. Others might roleplay and do things according to their character's player-defined personality (I myself am currently playing a racist, manipulative prick of a Human Noble). You can play however you want without serious worry about the "Munchkin / Min-Max" aspect. I fail to see how this is a poor moral choice system.ultrachicken said:
I like it when the bad guy is just to some extent either manipulated or just believing he is doing the right the thing, sorta like Saren, or if they are downright batshit crazy, like the Joker in the Dark Knight.
!!!Spoilers in here. I'm not going to bother pointing them out beforehand so if you don't want anything spoiled just avoid the whole thing.!!!
Well as much as like having that villain that you can just despise for being such an asshole (being "evil" usually doesn't make me angry, its when they're being a jerk that I get angry), finding out that the guy you thought was the bad guy isn't so different from you can be enjoyable. Sometimes I don't forgive them entirely, though I may see their reasoning. Saren's a good example of this, as I didn't bother to talk him out of a fight. I just didn't feel that his goals excused his methods and so didn't really pity him that much. As for Loghain it was quite different. After hearing him out at first I realized that his goals weren't really that different than mine. He made some bad choices, such as the retreat at Ostergar and recruiting Arl Howe, but after talking with him after his recruitment as a team member, I found that he was a guy that I really respected. He made some bad decisions but they weren't easy and I realized that the main reason that I didn't like him at first was because we was presented to be a bad guy.
I like enjoy the classic good versus evil plot everynow and then, but I really like it when a story has some serious choices that leave you pondering on which choice you prefer more, and even then leaves you wondering if it really was the better choice. It's much closer to real life where good/bad isn't that clear cut sometimes.
Well as much as like having that villain that you can just despise for being such an asshole (being "evil" usually doesn't make me angry, its when they're being a jerk that I get angry), finding out that the guy you thought was the bad guy isn't so different from you can be enjoyable. Sometimes I don't forgive them entirely, though I may see their reasoning. Saren's a good example of this, as I didn't bother to talk him out of a fight. I just didn't feel that his goals excused his methods and so didn't really pity him that much. As for Loghain it was quite different. After hearing him out at first I realized that his goals weren't really that different than mine. He made some bad choices, such as the retreat at Ostergar and recruiting Arl Howe, but after talking with him after his recruitment as a team member, I found that he was a guy that I really respected. He made some bad decisions but they weren't easy and I realized that the main reason that I didn't like him at first was because we was presented to be a bad guy.
I like enjoy the classic good versus evil plot everynow and then, but I really like it when a story has some serious choices that leave you pondering on which choice you prefer more, and even then leaves you wondering if it really was the better choice. It's much closer to real life where good/bad isn't that clear cut sometimes.
I think Dragon Age actually gave you the best of both worlds in regards to this. Sure Loghain had something of a redemptive aspect but, depending on your origin, he was may have been the sort of big bad but he wasn't the real moral evil centrepoint. As a dwarven noble, for example, you could exact complete vengeance on your traitorous brother. Sure he had a bit of a story too, but it was far from overly redeeming. Or, for the more obvious example, there was Arl Howe. Definitely no redeeming side to him, even in death.ExaltedK9 said:
I think ultimately my stance as to weather or not theirs good in my enemy simply comes down to this
I don't care. I really don't. Just because the big bad has a good reason for trying to wipe out humanity or steal your girlfriend doesn't change the fact that he's still doing said things. And if you're not gonna give me a way to resolve the situation without killing and kicking his ass don't add a long winded death full of melodrama speech and expect me to give a damn.
I'm not un-empathetic but I know when you're being cheap and I won't feel any remorse when it's all said and down
and that's what the problem with moral choice in games is as a whole, you're no making choices you're picking choices witch have a tangible value to factors into the engine.
Im not saying it cant be done right but it certainly does require a proper hand. For instance I quite liked BioShock 2's way of doing things. Well not the whole harvest/ rescue thing that's still stupid, but I did like how you're actions effected Elanor's sense of right and wrong, it became less an issue of changing the world and instead became a much more personal issue of how you end up teaching you're daughter to behave. Small interpersonal choices can be done right but a world engine is still far to massive to properly use and still feel organic
I don't care. I really don't. Just because the big bad has a good reason for trying to wipe out humanity or steal your girlfriend doesn't change the fact that he's still doing said things. And if you're not gonna give me a way to resolve the situation without killing and kicking his ass don't add a long winded death full of melodrama speech and expect me to give a damn.
I'm not un-empathetic but I know when you're being cheap and I won't feel any remorse when it's all said and down
and that's what the problem with moral choice in games is as a whole, you're no making choices you're picking choices witch have a tangible value to factors into the engine.
Im not saying it cant be done right but it certainly does require a proper hand. For instance I quite liked BioShock 2's way of doing things. Well not the whole harvest/ rescue thing that's still stupid, but I did like how you're actions effected Elanor's sense of right and wrong, it became less an issue of changing the world and instead became a much more personal issue of how you end up teaching you're daughter to behave. Small interpersonal choices can be done right but a world engine is still far to massive to properly use and still feel organic
Dragon Age certainly had a better moral choice system than Mass Effect. But, if youKimarous said:
want sidequests from your companions, they have to like you. And if they don't, then you don't
get to do their quests. Their quests generally come with cool new gear (Sten, Morrigan,
Leliana, and Zevran), so I'm naturally tempted to complete them.
Companions that like you also gain improved stats, which is definitely handy when you're
fighting a dragon or some crazy monster. If your team has low stats, you're likely to get
creamed.
There are plenty of ways to get your teamates to like you without pandering to them, or basing your moral decisions around their preferences.ultrachicken said:
Also, not to be a prick, but you're not writing a sonnet, you don't have to double-space your lines. That just makes it difficult to read, and undermines the message when it looks like theres a lengthy pause between statements. Sorry for my grammar nazi-ism.
It's true that there are other ways but I shouldn't be forced to to busy work because I made a choice that my parent hated me for. Busy work like gift giving and experimenting with who likes what is not good game design.
There's no problem to having a bad guy with some good tendencies, as long as it makes sense. You could have someone who's the head of an evil empire who say, still generally compassionate towards his people/men (Darth Malgus, for example). As long as it isn't there just to make the Big Bad redeemable.
I appreciate that Bioware and Bethesda are at least trying to implement moral choice systems, but they've got a long ways to go before they'll satisfy anyone with a genuine interest in storytelling and character development.
Paragon/Renegade looks swell on paper, but in practice? Just a binary switch you flip one way or the other at the very start of the game, and now every major choice is basically color coded for the rest of the journey. Sure, you can vary/waver, but there are tangible gameplay benefits when you stay the course. That's a mistake.
As for Dragon Age, the gifts undermine everything. You don't build rapport or friendship or romance with the characters in a meaningful or challenging fashion - not when the game allows you to pump everyone for 50-60 "points" with trinkets. The whole thing is just too damn transparent.
Really, that's the big issue with Bioware games. They've got it stuck in their brains that all social/story/characterization elements of their RPGs should be fantastically spelled out in ruinous detail. Meanwhile, in a very odd turn for the genre, the combat mechanics are typically far more obscure and impenetrable. So backwards.
Paragon/Renegade looks swell on paper, but in practice? Just a binary switch you flip one way or the other at the very start of the game, and now every major choice is basically color coded for the rest of the journey. Sure, you can vary/waver, but there are tangible gameplay benefits when you stay the course. That's a mistake.
As for Dragon Age, the gifts undermine everything. You don't build rapport or friendship or romance with the characters in a meaningful or challenging fashion - not when the game allows you to pump everyone for 50-60 "points" with trinkets. The whole thing is just too damn transparent.
Really, that's the big issue with Bioware games. They've got it stuck in their brains that all social/story/characterization elements of their RPGs should be fantastically spelled out in ruinous detail. Meanwhile, in a very odd turn for the genre, the combat mechanics are typically far more obscure and impenetrable. So backwards.
I don't mind them being not totally evil.But i do not like feeling bad for killing them because they were part good. Fable 3 I'm looking at you.Damn being good.
You know, most people actually find double-spaced text easier to read, which is why I do so. I won't for you anymore, I guess.ExaltedK9 said:
Unless you go searching through every nook and cranny for each gift, and magically know who will like what random piece of crap you dug up, then no, there is no way to get your teammates to like you without pandering to them.
Then they will just have to like you for who you are...ultrachicken said:
I see your dillemma.
All joking aside, I know Bioware has a long ways to go in terms of moral choice systems, but I think all of they're characters are expertly written.
And as far as getting your party to like you in DAO, if you arent keen on the gifting system (Which I found somewhat entertaining, matching their preferences with the trinkets I had, without the use of trial and error.) You could always do what I do: Form a complex love triangle, and weave an elaborate web of lies, until it inevitably blows up in your face.
Also, I rather enjoyed having a bit of rivalry between some choice teamates (I'm looking at you Sten) because sometimes its fun not to see eye to eye all the time. So, to the ones I found to be assholes, I didn't give a thought to their opinions of me.