Morals In Games

[GothmogII]

The Witcher, Planescape Torment and Deus Ex are the only games I've played that have offered moral choices beyond good, indifferent and evil. The witcher in particular gets props for giving the player hard choices.

Deus Ex, it was quite refreshing to be asked "this this or that?" insted of "Good, evil or arsehole?".

I've only played Deus Ex: IW, but I have heard it said that there was a dead set "evil" group in the first. The second only had diffrent view points.

Yes...there technically -is- a main villain and group, however, they aren't the ones you'd think of first and only really come to the fore later in the game. That said, the NSF aren't exactly saints either. Hell, not to spoil it, but the group -you're- working for at the start isn't really all that noble as it turns out.

 

[Skarvey]

The problem with morals in many games is that its a false choice, I mean sure, TFU gave us a great story about one man's redemption from the dark side, but it never factored into the gameplay. The only thing you could do in that game was kill people, it wasn't a choice between killing for good or evil, either way it came out the same, it was just hack and slash. Another thing about the moral system is that as often as not there is no benefit to being on either side of the moral compass. You're either good, or you're evil. Oftentimes, its just a hook to get you through one more playthrough because you want to see it from the opposite side of the Karma. That said, I'm really optimistic about Fallout 3, which promises some real skill perks as incentive to playing either side. In short summation, I feel that developers could be doing more to get gamers more involved in the emotionality of being good, evil or neutral.

 

[Beowulf DW]

I find morals in games to be very interesting because I can test my morality (which is something I rather enjoy) against situations I would likely never encounter in real life. In other words, it goes toward answering that timeless question, "What would you have done?"

If there's one thing missing from most games involving morality, it's balance. Most people aren't paragons of virtue or harbingers of malice, they're somewhere in between. Balance is also lacking in the consequences department. There are situations in which your choices can affect the outcome, and yet there are just as many situations in which your morality won't affect the outcome one single bit.

 

[ThePlasmatizer]

I think it's difficult to impliment morals in free choice games unless the player decides to play to his or her morals, iirc when the testers were playing Fable 2 they had a decision to give up some money to save a family which most of them did, when they changed it to you can save them but you will be scarred permanently a lot of players let them die,
you can't get around the fact that players will always treat it like a game and so their real life morals will be different.

 

[Imitation Saccharin]

Planescape Torment

The addition of chaotic vs. order is so simple yet so brilliant

 

[Simski]

Oddworld: Abe's odyssey, did morals pretty well I think.
The choices was pretty simple: save mudokon friends or kill/abandon mudokon friends.
Throughout the game, you either don't think about that choice that much and either just save them because you feel like it of kill them because it's funny.
Then at the end of the game, there's 2 alternative endings depending on what you did.

 

[RedElectric]

Thing is to me, when given these ethical(which may be a better word to use than moral, but i'm nitpicking)choices, I feel almost...condescended to. I'd like to play a game that first of all doesn't use strings of blatantly obvious diametrics and pass them off to me as 'ethical choices'. That's not an actual ethical choice, at least not in my estimation, just more of a 'loosing of the rules'. I'm going to try NOT to beat that dead horse at this time.

The second thing I'd love to see as far as ethical choices in games go, is a departure from reward or reprimand for the choices made. Not saying that depending on my choice that the world should remain stagnant, but in the actual mechanics of the game, i should not be rewarded any differently for making one choice over another. No special items, no running 'moral-o-meter'...nothing like that. Keep the effects of my choice to character relations.

Finally, I'd LOVE to play a game which I actually have to THINK about my decisions, based on the context of the knowledge that i have been given(up to the point of the choice) in game. I want to actually pause before i make a potentially game-changing decision. I WANT my ethics challenged! I don't want an easy out handed to me; make me actually work to stay consistent with my ethical code in-game. Oh, and make it stick. Like in Fallout(2?), if you kill kids, you're ALWAYS a child-killer, no matter how much good you do.

 

[Phoenix Arrow]

Err, in Enchanted Arms this happens.

Spoiler

You get the choice to either kill Toya, and hence save the world. Or you can not kill Toya but also save the world and subsequently Toya. Or, you save the game before this choice then do both endings. Killing Toya is ridiculously easy. Not killing him means you have to kill the Ice Queen by absorbing her into your arm, then the contents or you arm all comes shooting out and you have to kill it in a stupidly long and complicated boss battle. Seriosly, you spend like 50 minutes on it only to be wiped by a super move that you had no idea was coming. But hey, it looks pretty enough and I enjoy the combat mechanics enough to not throw my Xbox out the window each time the boss killed me.

You know, I'm not sure why I put that in spoiler marks seeing that it's painfully obvious. The first time you see Toya after the Queen takes him you can tell its coming. Much like how you can tell who the Mystery Man is the first time you see the back of his head. And who was to blame for all the Resistance fiasco.

 

[hem dazon 90]

far crys two's ocording to pc magazine uk is very good

 

[Gotham Soul]

I disdain moral choice in games and everything about it. Sure, I enjoy the dialogue in games like KotOR and Mass Effect but otherwise I'm still painfully playing with the knowledge that my choices have almost little to no effect and the only difference is who I kill and what CG ending I get.

 

[Archemetis]

"Man she's like, so evil, she's like the Emporer!"
"Yeah! 'Cept with Better Tits!"

"Yeah! And that other girl, she's so sweet, like Mother Theresa!"
"Yeah! 'Cept with Better Tits!"

-Evil Woman.

Anyway, i actually love the choice of adding moral choice into the games we play.
It offers a direction in gameplay and story-telling that most older games just simply forgot about.

I mean yeah i know most(if not all) "RPG-wannabe" games are doing it now.

But i'm also in complete agreement with anyone who said there doesn't seem to be much middle ground when it comes to games like this.

Which is a shame, which is what has got me so interested in (Oh yeah, Archemetis is mentioning it again!) Fable 2.
Seeing as they seem to be taking a deeper look into choice system.
At least from what i've read.
Which is good, means someone is going in the right direction.
of course it still remains to be seen whether they haven't "screwed up" this one too.
Although, despite its flaws Fable wasn't a gigantic flop.

But anyway!
With other games, like KOTOR, Jade Empire, Mass Effect and countless others that likely i haven't even heard of.
I don't often see it actually affect anything other then the type of gameplay style and ending scene.

I mean, assumedly in KOTOR (because i just COULDN'T bring myself to play it for too long)
When you play it all dark sidey you get a "bad ending" to celebrate it?
and vise versa if you play good.
But throughout Gameplay (for what i saw) no one ever responded to your life-style choice...

Say you've played the game as the most collossal arsehole on legs, does anyone try to avoid you if you walk too close to them? do they start whispering in little groups about the rumours they've heard of your bastardry?

I didn't see anything.

I mean in Jade Empire, you might get a piece of Dialogue (i think) but that's it.
In KOTOR everyone just got on with their ordinary NPC lives.
Mass Effect, well i only really talked to quest guys or whatever you might call 'em.
Bioshock, if you ate/murdered/mutliated/raped? a worringly large number of llittle girls did the Big Daddies conspire to kick you in on sight as a threat? Not that i ever saw.
Sure the little girls are unconditionally weary of you from the start, but that's not enough for me.

I think i'd prefer it if there was a moral choice system that actually affected everything/one around you

Like Fable, with the villagers running in fear or worshipping the ground you stand on.
But just more indepth.

Which again, is why i'm so excited about Fable 2.


But yeah, end of the day, Moral Choice, always a good point in my book, just needs to be thought through until there isn't a single aspect left untouched.

 

[TheMadDoctorsCat]

Most roleplaying games don't mind what type of character you choose or what your alignment is, you always end up doing the same old quests anyway. It's all rather boring sometimes. I've often wondered how much fun it would be if a game actually did let you slaughter all the helpless civillian kids, etc. Oddly, the only thing I could think was that eventually it'd get rather boring... the thing about evil empires in games (and films, and life generally come to that) is that they only exist to be overthrown by some overgrown teenager with a lightsaber.

 

[Juzari]

The problem with the "moral system" several games use is that there are no midpoints. You're either the kind of tree hugging hippie that would make old ladies call you a pussy, or you're a spawn of pure evil whose heart is so dark it can create black holes.

Thats pure poetry... anywho I really liked the choices in Mass Effect and Im looking forward to Fable 2 and Fallout 3 because I miss the middelground.

Thats why I like the D&D take on alignment where you have good and evil but also chaotic and lawful.
Mainly because evil in most games is just destruction of everything everywhere, you can't be methodical or any kind of "controlled" evil

Also, no one person who has ever been labeled as evil will ever see themselves as evil, they always believe that they are doing the right thing

 

[Dreey]

Anyone tried "Bards Tale"? Thats the best and funniest moralesystem ive seen. you have a choise between truth and lie, not evil and good. Sometimes the choices doesn't matter, and sometimes yor choises can destroy a village. And other times the good choises can get u into alot of trubble, and the evil choises can get you a super weapon. And at the end you have three choises good, bad and bail...

 

[TsunamiWombat]

Anyone tried "Bards Tale"? Thats the best and funniest moralesystem ive seen. you have a choise between truth and lie, not evil and good. Sometimes the choices doesn't matter, and sometimes yor choises can destroy a village. And other times the good choises can get u into alot of trubble, and the evil choises can get you a super weapon. And at the end you have three choises good, bad and bail...

I loved that the Bards Tale had "Bail" as a story option.

 

[n01d34]

The single biggest problem with moral choices in video games is that evil is usually 'Stupid-Evil'.

"I will kill you"
"But why it doesn't benefit you in anyway at all?"
"Shut up I'm doing it because I'm evil."

Mass Effect wins points for not having good versus evil rather utilitarianism versus individual rights. Plus it made a nice change from every other Bioware game where being evil is just becoming a Nietzschean Ubermensch. Oh and Too Human's pure human versus post-human thang was interesting but not very well implemented

 

[merc hunter]

the thing with the morals is it gioves you a chance do be a completely evil bastard and not have it effect you in real life. The Darkness is good for this like at the begining when your mates hurt and he gives you guns you can shoot him the game doesnt do anything about it or say good/bad things he just dies and you feel bad about it