Poll: Good/Evil Games
- Thread starter defcon 1
- Start date
Recommended Videos
In Bioshock killed a little sister once for kicks while my girlfriend was in the room... she almost made me sleep on the couch.jvm23fool post=9.69773.671103 said:
Ive played all those games and never intentionally gone the evil route - usuaully I end up with the good or more or less good ending - its important to ditinguish (as NWN and to a lesser degree mass effect did) between good/evil vs law/chaos - a lawful action (completing a task set to you by a superior) is not always a morally good one, and conrtarywise, a chaotic act may not fly the banner of evil (robin hood and and jedi after 19bby wherent what youd call sadistic in breaking the "law")defcon 1 post=9.69773.670819 said:
I usually tend to be good, but in a Neutral Good ends-justifies-the-means badassery kind of way. Most of the time.
I wanted to see what happened when you harvest a Little Sister, so I saved my game right before one and did the deed. I promptly loaded it up again and saved her instead, and never even considered harvesting ever again. Of course, the gifts Tanenbaum sends you more than makes up for the short-term loss in Adam, but even if they weren't there and players who wanted to spare the Little Sisters had to make it through the entire game with level 1 Electroshock and Covered In Bees I think I'd still struggle on because there's something about turning little girls inside out in exchange for power ups that just doesn't sit well with me.
In games like KOTOR where it's at least a little more ambiguous (by comparison to Bioshock, naturally) I always end up light siding it. Partly because of the way I was raised, I suppose (my parents have both done a lot of charity work in their time and it's rubbed off on me) but mostly it's because the Sith just look like schoolyard bullies with lightsabers, and while I hate their sort I don't quite hate them enough to end up becoming them when I get some power of my own. That said, unless it means dark side points I'm usually pretty keen to lead the charged conversations towards provocation followed by slicing them into thin strips rather than letting them slink off to commit more atrocities once I'm out of earshot. My Revan & Exile may be merciful, but they ain't stupid.
Mind you, I'm one of those halo-polishing boy scouts who's never played GTA because I'm uncomfortable playing a criminal, so maybe I'm too far biased to be worth listening to. I didn't have any qualms about powersliding into crowds of terrified shoppers in Carmageddon, though. Maybe it's because I was a teenager when I first played it.
-Nick
In games like KOTOR where it's at least a little more ambiguous (by comparison to Bioshock, naturally) I always end up light siding it. Partly because of the way I was raised, I suppose (my parents have both done a lot of charity work in their time and it's rubbed off on me) but mostly it's because the Sith just look like schoolyard bullies with lightsabers, and while I hate their sort I don't quite hate them enough to end up becoming them when I get some power of my own. That said, unless it means dark side points I'm usually pretty keen to lead the charged conversations towards provocation followed by slicing them into thin strips rather than letting them slink off to commit more atrocities once I'm out of earshot. My Revan & Exile may be merciful, but they ain't stupid.
Mind you, I'm one of those halo-polishing boy scouts who's never played GTA because I'm uncomfortable playing a criminal, so maybe I'm too far biased to be worth listening to. I didn't have any qualms about powersliding into crowds of terrified shoppers in Carmageddon, though. Maybe it's because I was a teenager when I first played it.
-Nick
I answered both because I typically play through any game as the "good guy" or version first, typically I stay that way, though sometimes being the bad guy is just so much more fun..
though certainly there are games like WoW in which Horde seems the Dark Side, but either faction, Horde or Alliance, views the opposing faction as the bad guys.. so who is bad? Neither? Both?
though certainly there are games like WoW in which Horde seems the Dark Side, but either faction, Horde or Alliance, views the opposing faction as the bad guys.. so who is bad? Neither? Both?
I know why playing the bastard is more fun, and I know that it should be more fun, but... I dunno, I don't see the attraction. It just leaves a sick feeling in my stomach. I was honestly surprised when I handed the controller to my friend during a game of Crackdown and watched him go on a rampage. I always play the good guy in games, because it's just not fun otherwise.
Yes I realize that, but I said usually, not always... and I hated that part of my team... a bunch of whiney bitches..Geo Da Sponge post=9.69773.671008 said:
I usually run through a game twice; first time I play nice, second time I play evil.
Strangely enough, I have yet to see a game where choosing the "evil" options on a solid basis yielded any sort of significant difference in personal gain.
For example, something along of these lines happens sometimes in the campaigns of NWN2;
PC: now that I've saved your sorry arse, what do you have to tell me about the baddie?
NPC: blablaevilblablaplotblabla
---------
now, it can go these two ways
Good-
---------
PC(G): thank you, by the way, here is a little something to buy you safe passage far away from the baddies' vengeance.
NPC: thank you so very much, here, you can have this. I don't need it anymore! "leaves" *player character loses an insignificant amount of gold, player character gains an obscene amount of xp, player receives a powerful and maybe useful item worth the value of their negligible donation an infinite time over.
---------
Evil-
---------
PC(E) Thank you, now, gimme your stuff or I'll turn you over to the baddie.
NPC: Bastard! "leaves" *player receives a negligible amount of gold, player receives a quite ordinary amount of xp*
the same thing happens in bioshock, while one could argue that your actions are even more evil when there is nothing to gain by performing them, it bugs me to no end that an unending chain of selfish decisions end you up with less personal gain than selflessly sacrificing yourself to others.
Strangely enough, I have yet to see a game where choosing the "evil" options on a solid basis yielded any sort of significant difference in personal gain.
For example, something along of these lines happens sometimes in the campaigns of NWN2;
PC: now that I've saved your sorry arse, what do you have to tell me about the baddie?
NPC: blablaevilblablaplotblabla
---------
now, it can go these two ways
Good-
---------
PC(G): thank you, by the way, here is a little something to buy you safe passage far away from the baddies' vengeance.
NPC: thank you so very much, here, you can have this. I don't need it anymore! "leaves" *player character loses an insignificant amount of gold, player character gains an obscene amount of xp, player receives a powerful and maybe useful item worth the value of their negligible donation an infinite time over.
---------
Evil-
---------
PC(E) Thank you, now, gimme your stuff or I'll turn you over to the baddie.
NPC: Bastard! "leaves" *player receives a negligible amount of gold, player receives a quite ordinary amount of xp*
the same thing happens in bioshock, while one could argue that your actions are even more evil when there is nothing to gain by performing them, it bugs me to no end that an unending chain of selfish decisions end you up with less personal gain than selflessly sacrificing yourself to others.
I usually can't stand doing evil things in a game. It took a lot of willpower for me to kill the first little sister in bioshock in order to see the alternate ending. Not worth it. Even the game Overlord, where you're supposed to be evil, I ended up being the nicest evil ruler there ever was. I just don't find pleasure in doing evil things, even in a virtual scenario.
I like to experiment with both, but if I have a choice I usually choose to be evil, because it makes me feel like a badass, especially in the good WRPGs like KotOR and Neverwinter Nights.
I play once through on evil, then on good, then on evil again, then try the middle ground, then good, then evil. usually in that order.
Yeah, thats most good charachters you encounter in games like Mass Effect are marketable steroetypes who seem like thier archetype has been beaten to a blimey pulp,and then unbeated Sands of Time Trilogy, dooming it to an eternity of pain and suffering. I usually like being tht baddest mother in a game and relish the chance for me to beat them, set their children on fire, and kick them in the nuts once evry 2 mins for 24 days in a row, or until they keel over a beg for mercy, whichever comes first.Darthracoon post=9.69773.670910 said:
I sort of hate the Good/Evil mechanic. I think game developers need to get their head in a book once in a while and realize that very few "villains" are just in it for the cash or "taking over the world" or "bringing misery to others". Often they're motivated by the desire to change the world in a way they believe benefits it. In the end, they're TRYING to be a hero; they just have different beliefs.
That's why I liked Deus Ex. The game leaves you with three different ending choices, but none of them are plainly put as the "good" ending. One leaves the entire world in a technological dark age, and the other two involve you using a machine that tracks all communications in the world to govern it as you see fit. I'd like more games like that where whether your actions are "good" or "bad" are defined by you and what you believe.
Actually, Phoenix Wright: Justice For All ALMOST has a very, very split ending. I don't want to spoil anything, but basically before the trial ends, you're left with a decision that decides people's fate, and whatever you choose, someone is going to die.
That's why I liked Deus Ex. The game leaves you with three different ending choices, but none of them are plainly put as the "good" ending. One leaves the entire world in a technological dark age, and the other two involve you using a machine that tracks all communications in the world to govern it as you see fit. I'd like more games like that where whether your actions are "good" or "bad" are defined by you and what you believe.
Actually, Phoenix Wright: Justice For All ALMOST has a very, very split ending. I don't want to spoil anything, but basically before the trial ends, you're left with a decision that decides people's fate, and whatever you choose, someone is going to die.
I tend to go with whatever my whim at the moment is. The first time I played through KOTOR, I did Darkside, The first time I played the sequel, I played Lightside. The first time I played Mass Effect, I was sort of quasi-evil, I picked some evil choices, but most of them were neutral. It was just whichever I felt like at the time, and I usually don't go with every evil choice or every good choice. I tend to roleplay. In Bioshock, however, I went purely good and never harvested a single Little Sister. I wanted a challenge with the lesser amount of EVE and all. Of course, it turned out you end up getting pretty much the same amount, but whatever.
After the first playthrough I always play it again to see what each extreme is like.
After the first playthrough I always play it again to see what each extreme is like.
My nature usually depends upon the game and it's representation of good vs evil. In games like say Overlord where it's cartoon evil with no serious quality to it I find evil to be a barrel of laughs. Whereas in a game like Bioshock, the game does a very good job of invoking emotion about your actions, and I couldn't bring myself to kill the little ones.
It also depends on how the game treats the two. Jade empire had the closed/open palm choices which ultimately amounted to good/evil and yet the closed fist path is much more satisfying then normal evil choices because it has an interesting kind of Darwinian struggle philosophy to it. Mass effect really didn't do the best job of representing evil as you more or less come across as a racist jerk instead of the typical evil which would have done just as well.
I do have a problem with the two sides with no middle ground thing. Although no one seems to understand it's very hard to make a good/evil game with a decent neutral ending. The whole game you're usually on a quest to save or control the world in an epic journey across vast distances. How do you make a decent neutral ending when your game builds the final confrontation up so much. They tried in Jade empire by giving you the surrender option and yet it leaves you feeling unsatisfied and has the same results as the evil ending in the long run.
It also depends on how the game treats the two. Jade empire had the closed/open palm choices which ultimately amounted to good/evil and yet the closed fist path is much more satisfying then normal evil choices because it has an interesting kind of Darwinian struggle philosophy to it. Mass effect really didn't do the best job of representing evil as you more or less come across as a racist jerk instead of the typical evil which would have done just as well.
I do have a problem with the two sides with no middle ground thing. Although no one seems to understand it's very hard to make a good/evil game with a decent neutral ending. The whole game you're usually on a quest to save or control the world in an epic journey across vast distances. How do you make a decent neutral ending when your game builds the final confrontation up so much. They tried in Jade empire by giving you the surrender option and yet it leaves you feeling unsatisfied and has the same results as the evil ending in the long run.