Moral systems in games

[stebsy]

I have a big problem with moral systems in games. I feel that it takes the choice away from actualy role playing because if im good im always choosing the good options and vice versa. Take mass effect for example, the good responses are always at the top and the bad at the bottom on the conversation wheel. Because I know that, I never think about what I say I just pick the option that goes with my character (good/evil)

The only game I can think off the top of my head that I would properly roleplay was dragon age origins because it didn't funnel my thinking if that makes sense, it just had a list of possible responses that were more then hugging someone or being a complete cock as possible outcomes. Does anyone else have this problem?

 

[artanis_neravar]

I have a big problem with moral systems in games. I feel that it takes the choice away from actualy role playing because if im good im always choosing the good options and vice versa. Take mass effect for example, the good responses are always at the top and the bad at the bottom on the conversation wheel. Because I know that, I never think about what I say I just pick the option that goes with my character (good/evil)

The only game I can think off the top of my head that I would properly roleplay was dragon age origins because it didn't funnel my thinking if that makes sense, it just had a list of possible responses that were more then hugging someone or being a complete cock as possible outcomes. Does anyone else have this problem?

Do you get something special for being completely good/evil in Mass Effect?

 

[HumpinHop]

I know what you mean. I'm paraphrasing from Yahtzee here but most morality games only let you choose from being Mother Theresa or Albert Fish (look him up at your own risk). There seems to be no middleground or inbetween, like Lawful Good or Chaotic Neutral, just good and evil. I would love for a game that had you pick a neutral option.

 

[HumpinHop]

I have a big problem with moral systems in games. I feel that it takes the choice away from actualy role playing because if im good im always choosing the good options and vice versa. Take mass effect for example, the good responses are always at the top and the bad at the bottom on the conversation wheel. Because I know that, I never think about what I say I just pick the option that goes with my character (good/evil)

The only game I can think off the top of my head that I would properly roleplay was dragon age origins because it didn't funnel my thinking if that makes sense, it just had a list of possible responses that were more then hugging someone or being a complete cock as possible outcomes. Does anyone else have this problem?

Do you get something special for being completely good/evil in Mass Effect?

I haven't played the original, but if it's anything like the sequel I think it affects the ending you get.

 

[stebsy]

Do you get something special for being completely good/evil in Mass Effect?[/quote]

New dialog options that are even more good or evil lol

 

[badgersprite]

Do you get something special for being completely good/evil in Mass Effect?

Yeah, Charm/Intimidate points were unlocked with Paragon and Renegade values, and using Charm and Intimidate was effectively the only way to end several missions in the best way possible. Basically, doing anything less was like being a failure, or missing out on the best rewards. In ME2, the two were separated, though.

OT: I'm not a big fan of these systems in general, but, actually, that was one of the things I liked about Dragon Age 2. If you didn't like a character, you didn't have to pussyfoot around it and be nice to them to win friendship points. You could tell them exactly how stupid you thought they were, and they would respect you more for it by unlocking more rival points, and locking them in friendship or rivalry once they maxed out, which makes sense. I mean, you're saving each others asses constantly in combat over six years. Having someone not care about you anymore because you said something in a quest seems stupid.

So, yeah, I'm still against morality systems in general, but that approval system was one of the things I thought did work about DA2.

 

[stebsy]

I know what you mean. I'm paraphrasing from Yahtzee here but most morality games only let you choose from being Mother Theresa or Albert Fish (look him up at your own risk). There seems to be no middleground or inbetween, like Lawful Good or Chaotic Neutral, just good and evil. I would love for a game that had you pick a neutral option.

For me the problem isn't a lack of neutral options its that every decision is labelled. I want to Finnish a game and not have my ending defined as good or evil but as my own ending created by the decisions I felt I had to make in the given situations.

 

[CM156_v1legacy]

I don't really have that problem because I play as a good type of person. I just enjoy RPGs that way

However, I don't mind the "Law vs Chaos" axis, which I've seen done well in games. Say what you will about Fable II, I enjoyed the option to play "Pure(Lawful) Evil"

 

[crudus]

I know what you mean. I'm paraphrasing from Yahtzee here but most morality games only let you choose from being Mother Theresa or Albert Fish (look him up at your own risk). There seems to be no middleground or inbetween, like Lawful Good or Chaotic Neutral, just good and evil. I would love for a game that had you pick a neutral option.

I actually always play my character on a dual-axis system even if there isn't one. It does lead to a more balanced character in my mind, but you get punished for doing so in games like Mass Effect.

 

[TheIronRuler]

I just don't understand how some people can SENSE your damned Karma, like a blood hound.
If you've destroyed a comunity and killed every single inhabitant, WHO KNOWS that you did it?
Why would it affect something?
If you've stolen from someone and you weren't caught, why should people look down on you? They don't know what you did.

 

[CM156_v1legacy]

I just don't understand how some people can SENSE your damned Karma, like a blood hound.
If you've destroyed a comunity and killed every single inhabitant, WHO KNOWS that you did it?
Why would it affect something?
If you've stolen from someone and you weren't caught, why should people look down on you? They don't know what you did.

Depends on the series.

If it's anything like DnD (Before 4th edition), some people have Detect Evil, or an "Evildar"

In games like Fable, it morphs your physical apperance. Am I going to trust the guy who looks like a demon, or an angel?

And Mass Effect has that weird glowy thing.

But for games like Fallout? Yeah, it makes no sense.

 

[Sangnz]

Well implemented in an appropriate manner they are fine (a la just about any bioware game out there), however this is rarely the case and are often used to pad out the re-playability value of the games by providing good and bad versions of the character while having little impact on the game.
A true moral choice system is not something any game developer should put into a game half assed because it just comes off as being cheap and tacky, if you want to do good vs evil do that just stop trying to hide it behind some sort of moral choice system that has no other impact than deciding if you get the good powers or bad powers.

 

[kyogen]

Writers and developers clearly struggle to implement moral-choice systems well, but they can be used to bring up interesting problems and game options. The worst designs are usually the most egregiously simple--Dante's Inferno comes to mind. The OP mentions Dragon Age: Origins as an example of a variation--social approval--that works fairly well. The Witcher 1 and 2 also offers many nuanced choices.

 

[TheIronRuler]

I just don't understand how some people can SENSE your damned Karma, like a blood hound.
If you've destroyed a comunity and killed every single inhabitant, WHO KNOWS that you did it?
Why would it affect something?
If you've stolen from someone and you weren't caught, why should people look down on you? They don't know what you did.

Depends on the series.

If it's anything like DnD (Before 4th edition), some people have Detect Evil, or an "Evildar"

In games like Fable, it morphs your physical apperance. Am I going to trust the guy who looks like a demon, or an angel?

And Mass Effect has that weird glowy thing.

But for games like Fallout? Yeah, it makes no sense.

All of these examples are ways to go around the problem...

 

[The_Vigilant]

To answer your question, I do and I don't. I agree that the moral system funnels your decision making into a simple dichotomy in every situation and this is not an ideal roleplaying model. However, the reality is that angels and demons are the most fun to play anyway. The real world is so gray and the consequences for decisions so significant, that we all live our own lives as morally ambiguous opportunists. It's always more fun to play someone who puts principle ahead of everything because he doesn't have a mortgage or kids, and is strong enough to handle the crimelords who come after him for his do-gooding (not to mention everyone kisses the ground you walk on when you behave like this). Inversely, it's equally fun to play a being whose malevolence is matched only by his power; an agent of destruction whose very presence reduces people to cowering and incoherent stutters and who can destroy even an army sent to bring him to justice. Try doing those things in real life and see how far you get. Try being morally flexible and reactionary on the other hand and...oh wait, you already are. How boring. These are fantasy games after all, so its reasonable to encourage a fantasy.

Part of the problem is the games actually reward you for going completely one way or the other. In the Bioware games you typically get real, gameplay-affecting bonuses for specializing completely in one mindset or the other. In addition to that, NPC reactions and story outcomes are the most rewarding and interesting if you play your morality to an extreme. It might help to solve the problem to a degree if instead of a dichotomy there was a trichotomy. And just as your love interest might remark "how your face radiates with angelic beauty" or people faint from fear in your presence depending on your choices, NPCs might react with confusion about your decisions if you choose a morally gray path. They might even make radical decisions that they wouldn't make in the face of a purely good or purely evil protagonist simply because of their inability to predict your imminent decisions. Rewarding the opportunistic player with an equally rich experience (as what he would enjoy in a "pure" playthrough) is key to the solution.

Do you get something special for being completely good/evil in Mass Effect?

Yeah, it unlocked conversation options that could resolve situations in a totally ideal way when the tools to do so were absent otherwise.

 

[AmaterasuGrim]

The moral choice system suck's i can kill everyone who saw me do something bad & everyone not there knows what i did, i want a game where they only know if they saw me and got away I've always hated this with fallout you kill an entire gang leave no witnesses & they still say the gang now hates you.

 

[Fishyash]

IMO it shouldn't give a tangible... reward for tracking stuff. I think the differences between good and evil should be minor. A way to track your morality (cosmetic or otherwise) is bad IMO. It's quite unrealistic and makes your morality seem more like a thing, rather than part of your character.

Sure, give some stuff. Some RPGs can let you use certain items depending on your alignment for example.

You should NOT be denied of conversational options because of your alignment. It should not be a slippery slope kind of thing and you should DEFINATELY not be forced to continue down one alignment.

I think a great solution to this is...

Stop calling it good/evil. I like how mass effect did it, paragon/renegade. However I think there should be more than just a good/evil sliding scale.

Secondly get rid of meters and major cosmetic changes. It's just stupid and breaks immersion IMO. Changes the question from "what would this character do?" into "what will get me the good/evil points I need?"

Thirdly, and most importantly, if you are going to reward players for being good/evil item-wise, then give rewards for neurtral players too. Seriously. Why are people forced to go all the way to get the best stuff?