Moral choices

weiland79

With many games including a moral choices at the moment i.e Fallout 3, Heavy rain, Infamous. I was just wondering what people generally tend to lean towards Hero or Villian? Personally i generally play through as the good guy usually trying to make the ' right ' decision. Saving the girl or helping the farmer protect his land etc. What about you guy's?

FortuneChip

Burn... Them... All...

Those folk in Megaton never stood a chance

Depends on the game though. I was a right bastard in Fallout 3. Whereas in Heavy Rain I was an out and out hero

Retr0gamer

I usually do the right thing but also don't take any **** as a character so sometimes get in trouble.

I played a small bt of KotoR before and recently finished Mass Effect. What I find about these bioware games is that the gulf between being good and bad is way too big. You are either a complete and utter bellend or a goody goody two shoes.They really need to be thought out a lot better. You either take the bad choice which makes the game easier but you end up hurting characters you have grown attached to or you take the good choice but miss out on important unique equipment or gameplay sections. The penalties for taking the good path need to be harsh.

I think Fallout 3 had some great quests in it that had a lot of moral ambiquity. Broken Steels choice was really tough to make and despite playing the whole game with good karma I couldn't take the good option because of what it involved. For me this was a brilliant example or moral choice since it made me stray from the path I'd set myself in the game. The quest with the talking tree was excellent as well. Plenty of ways to finish the quest but none of them left everyone perfectly happy.

Sabre0001

I often play a balanced enough game - a human rather than the epitomy of good or evil.

Most recent example is Bioshock 2 - met with three choices

Left Grace alive - it was a misunderstanding and she seemed ok. Killed the man who turned me into a Big Daddy after hearing some of the story...Killed the man who took too much Adam - his message when he was still sane indicated that he would like to be killed rather than left as a mutated mess.

weiland79

It's funny I've just recently restarted Fallout 3 and I'm trying to play it through bad to the bone but It's actually quite difficult as it goes against the grain (mine at least) I mean It's not a nice feeling being bad to your little girlfriend at your birthday party in Vault 101.

SeantheMan

Played Fallout 3, 1st as goody,,,then 2nd not as baddy..but a badass !

Like I'd tell those Kid-Nappers ....that I'd work for them...bring em a Child...but then break out Jack Bauer style and slaughter everyone.

Same for the prostitues in that guys house, ask for sex - refused - followed by death.

Hhaha...and obviously destroying Megaton and then letting them into Tenpenny tower..but then killng them all anyways.

The good life !

calex71

SeantheMan wrote: »

Played Fallout 3, 1st as goody,,,then 2nd not as baddy..but a badass !

Like I'd tell those Kid-Nappers ....that I'd work for them...bring em a Child...but then break out Jack Bauer style and slaughter everyone.

Same for the prostitues in that guys house, ask for sex - refused - followed by death.

Hhaha...and obviously destroying Megaton and then letting them into Tenpenny tower..but then killng them all anyways.

The good life !

Destroying Megaton at night is worth seeing from the top of the tower , was one of the best good to be bad moments ever for me

In fallout it really doesn't make life easy being bad, I remember when I 1st started playing it, I killed Lucas Simms and immediately regretted it

Antar Bolaeisk

I always play the good guy but I'm finding some of the decisions in Dragon Age to be very borderline

such as killing the possessed child instead of at least entertaining the thought of running off to the Circle of Magi and venturing into the fade to kill the posessing demon

Playing evil just doesn't sit well with me.

Fanny Cradock

Retr0gamer wrote: »

The quest with the talking tree was excellent as well. Plenty of ways to finish the quest but none of them left everyone perfectly happy.

Just started that quest today. I actually stopped playing because I wanted to find out the wiki article on the outcomes. Tough choices indeed. But I think assisted immolation is out.

johnny_ultimate

I'm pretty much always the good guy as well, makes me uncomfortable to act 'wrong' all the time in games. I also think many developers are far too obsessed with 'good' and 'bad' moral choices. I'd love to see a game that punishes the player unpredictably down the line for making a particular decision. There are plenty of good choices out there, now for some interesting consequences please!

In general, I'd say Fable 2 still stands out for having some truly thoughtful decisions. Doing the 'good' thing in one section, for example, sucked away all your stockpiled experience points, which was a really clever idea. The final three choice decision was also pretty powerful, with all the options having significant gameplay consequences for your character.

Heavy Rain also had a few solid moments -

no way was I going to kill that drug dealer, but I had no qualms with self mutilation! Unfortunately it kind of shot itself in the foot with a silly conclusion and that stupid mass murder scene,

but it was a game that had interesting consequences for seemingly mundane decisions.

dreamers75

There needs to be a 3rd option , be evil but clever enough to get away with it and suffer no consquences as long as you dont get caught.


In Oblivion i murdered about 4 people by accident and hid them in a closet but they fell out and i got caught

Canis Lupus

I'd prefer the choices to be less clear cut.

It drives me nuts when it's: You can either kill the pink large eyed fluffy bunny rabbit or hug it, give it a carrot and let it live and you have aaaaaalllll day to decide.

If something the character is about to do is large enough to be considered a moral decision I want me, the player to have to choose quickly and it perhaps not have the easy clear cut sides. Mass Effect has some that head in the right direction ie blowing up a planet to save the universe and making someone stay to do the blowing up (I may have gotten that wrong as it's been a while).

I'd like to see way more effort in these system because for the most part I just find them stupid.

rizzla

johnny_ultimate wrote: »

Heavy Rain also had a few solid moments -

no way was I going to kill that drug dealer, but I had no qualms with self mutilation! Unfortunately it kind of shot itself in the foot with a silly conclusion and that stupid mass murder scene,

but it was a game that had interesting consequences for seemingly mundane decisions.

How is either of those examples you gave a mundane decision? I thought Heavy Rain had little moral choice in the game, it would play out exactly the same any way you played it until the final few chapters.

I enjoy moral choices in games, always play as the goody two shoes first time through. I agree with Mass Effect having very little grey area but Fallout 3 is just all about the grey, there's no right or wrong, black or white, it's all just different shades of grey.

My biggest moral choice in Fallout 3 was

I think this was in one of the add-ons. I had to free some slaves/cure them from something, I needed to kidnap the mayors baby daughter. The mayor who had turned most of the city into slaves. I got into the mayors office and found the baby, as well as some audio tapes of the mayors plight and how he had to keep the people as slaves so he can safely, without harming his baby extract a cure from her. I was given the choice to give the baby to the slaves so they can fast track a cure by any means, or allow the mayor to keep the slaves while he safely worked on a cure with his baby and as soon as he found a cure would free the slaves.

Took me ages to make my decision, neither one felt right but that's what I loved about Fallout 3, all the grey.

johnny_ultimate

rizzla wrote: »

How is either of those examples you gave a mundane decision? I thought Heavy Rain had little moral choice in the game, it would play out exactly the same any way you played it until the final few chapters.

Those examples are indeed not mundane, I'm thinking more along the lines of moments earlier in the game where the focus was on little character moments as opposed to the more dramatic stuff that comes later. One example that pops

out was the bit where you can drink or not drink the beverage a man hands you. While I thought there was something a bit odd, I still chose to drink it, and ended up being drugged.

It was a small moment, but one where just following the instructions as they appear leads to negative consequences. I would agree, however, that on the whole the game had serious flaws, and it is indeed a shame the story didn't branch more than it did. Story also went to **** near the end, which undid a lot of the interesting work from earlier in the game.

While I liked Mass Effect 2 a lot, it also showed how hand guided games can be in relation to moral decisions. 'Good' and 'evil' decisions are clearly marked as blue and red respectively. While the 'good' choice may not always be the action you'd think is entirely right, you are never in much doubt what path to follow if you are seeking to become good or evil.

Fanny Cradock

dreamers75 wrote: »

In Oblivion i murdered about 4 people by accident and hid them in a closet but they fell out and i got caught

Really? That must have been a big closet.

I thought that any crime was automatically registered as a crime irrespective of witnesses. It used to annoy me when I would get thrown in clinky because I accidentally pocketed a fork a week before hand. It has been a while, though.

Overheal

Like Retro said; theres too big a gap between good and evil choices. Theres not enough grey area, and more than that tbph it shouldnt be on a clearly defined sliding scale/multiple choice. I'd like to see some scenarios so ambiguous that you might not be quite sure which is the Good Choice and Which is the Bad Choice.

jaykhunter

Interesting! Great post weiland.

I tend to always just do what I myself would do in a given situation (if it were reality); which ends up as 95% good/noble choices, with a slight heelish streak (eg taking the bribe from a slave driver, then killing him and freeing the slaves; or killing a murderer instead of letting him live etc etc) Sometimes i don't like a particular NPC so I don't help him out.

With those games I usually burn through the game a second time and play as a heel; making all the alternative choices and seeing how that works. Fable II was interesting to do it like that, as I was a face but chose the selfish ending option, and then went as a heel but choosing the face/altruistic option.

I completely agree that there isn't enough grey area; it's usually plain "good" or "bad" and not 2 ambiguous, thought-provoking choices. It's a real shame because that grey area has the best potential for a truly engaging storyline.

Daniel Floyd, a professor & games designer has a fantastic presentation about video games and moral choices (amongst other fantastic presentations). I'd highly recommend giving it a watch.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6_KU3lUx3u0

Mr. K

I'm usually the good guy, generally that presents the most opportunities. The only exception has been the KOTOR games, but only because Sith are awesome and have red lightsabers!

Kiith

I generally find myself getting uncomfortale playing the bad guy, especially in games i've played before as a good guy. I tried to be a total jerk in Baldur's Gate 2 recently, and found myslef getting uncomfortable insulting Imoen. And she's one of the characters that i found slightly more annoying first time around.

I guess i'm destined to be a nancy boy hero my entire gaming life

Mr. K wrote: »

I'm usually the good guy, generally that presents the most opportunities. The only exception has been the KOTOR games, but only because Sith are awesome and have red lightsabers!

Jedi could have red lightsabers too...although purple was better regardless.

Speaking of getting better rewards for being bag, Slayer in Baldur's Gate 2 was ****ing cool. Your evil? Then transform into a giant, unstoppable killing machine. Who cares if you get -2 allignment, your already super evil.

Retr0gamer

The four games in the main Shin Megami Tensei series have a pretty good moral choice running through the game that affects the storyline. You can align yourself with 3 factions, law chaos or neutral. Neither of the 3 are purely good or bad. Law usually involves aligning yourself with god in the creation of a paradise. However this paradise is only for the few and the rest will die and in paradise humans are at the whims of the laws set by God. Chaos involves aligning yourself with Lucifier and creating a world were humans are totally free to do what they will free from any law although it carries the threat of total anarchy. Neutral involves humanity taking it's destiny in it's own hands and living ina society governed by laws but also giving freedom to the individual. However choosing this path usually means ending up with a lot of innocent blood on your hands. Which ever faction you choose will dictate the ending you get in the game and will also affect what demons you can summon to help you.

thebman

Most moral choice systems just annoy me and I pick the darker route as your usually more powerful and it isn't real life so I didn't really kill the kid in the game.

Some games do it properly where it isn't stupid extremes, however usually right and wrong are too obvious.

For a proper moral choice system it should be subtle and just you playing the game with behind the scenes weightings leading to different endings IMO.

Duggy747

I'm an all round hero in Oblivion, though I did push The Adoring Fan off a cliff we wer climbing.................naturally, there was no witnesses except for a wolf which I quick dispensed of.

In Fallout 3 I'm a bit of a prick but a good guy underneath my tough, chocolate nutty shell.

Kiith

The worst thing in games with these choices is, when you spend your entire game being either really nice or a total douche, and then right before the last boss you get to go left to be evil or right to be good. Regardless of how many innocent people you saved/slaughtered.

Bulktohulk

It really depends on the game for me and how your choices impact the game. In Mass Effect for instance, I always go renegade but in Fable games I usually play the goodie two shoes. In more sandboxy games like Oblivion, it wasn't quite as clear cut. I made decisions on a step by step bases so depending on the circumstances sometimes I do the evil things (steal horses etc...) and sometimes I wouldn't.

randomchild

I think Fallout did this best in the

Tenpenny Tower

side quest. Without going into spoilering details, the player is presented not only with a tough moral dilemma, but with several questionable means to pursuing the goals of the mission. However, the masterstroke is if the player takes the

peaceful route, forging a truce between the two side. If the player returns he finds that this truce has broken down into bloodshed and the extermination of one side, the same result as if he had violently sided with a faction, leading to the conclusion that no matter how moral one tries to be, sometimes one's actions are doomed to futility

Mr. K

Kiith wrote: »

Jedi could have red lightsabers too...although purple was better regardless.

They could, but it didn't really suit them! There's a really cool concept art picture of Revan with red and purple lightsabers,

so I modelled my character after this

.

On topic, I was an angel in Fallout 3.

pwd

Me in -
Fallout 3: Good
KoTOR2: Very bad highly corrupting Emporer-style character
Baldur's Gate etc: Chaotic good/neutral, even though in Torment I

did sell my friend into slavery for a killing spell

so I'm not sure how you get to be considered non-good in that game.
The Witcher: The elves (

good

)
Black & White: Very bad with an angelic pet
Bioshock: Good. The actions available to become bad were sick tbh; entirely distasteful.
ADOM: Lawful (game is too hard to finish as chaotic tbh, even when savescumming)
Oblivion: Very good, apart from being a blood-sucking vampire. Oh - and a paid assassin. And a thief. I did save the world from damnation though.

So in summary in games I'm usually bad, except for when being bad means killing children. Bit of a Tony Montana I guess.

The Witcher has the most interesting moral choices of any game I played. You aren't presented with clear cut issues, generally. Also the effects of your decisions aren't apparent until some time later in the game (at which point they make it clear what decision had what effect). Different people might have different opinions on whether eachh faction is good or bad in the game also (until the end), and you do have the option of not siding with either. There is no moral alignment system. You will be forced to side with different characters or groups who are at conflict. You can choose not to side with either of the main factions though.

K.O.Kiki

I do not want to kill it.
I do not want to kill the Colossus.
But... I must.
For my love...

SeantheMan

Didn't wanna create a new thread for this, so just searched an old one.

With people talking about the choices in "I am Alive" and the inevitable discussions in ME3, I thought I'd post.

I usually always play the good guy, and I did in ME1 and ME2 (xbox 360)
But in waiting for ME3, I played through both ME1 and ME2 again ...but decided to be the total badass (this time on PC, as I wanted to keep my 360 save for ME3 as a goody)

At the start, it niggled at my conscience, some of the choices I made, but after a few hours I started to love it, just doing whatever I wanted and being a total jerk.

The reason I'd always be the good guy, is because I believe I am so morally, but also that the best rewards are given to the good guys in games usually, so I thought I'd have trouble being a bad ass for once...turns out I am basically Jack Bauer :P

I'm not sure what kind of characters people are taking over to ME3, but I now have an issue as I've enjoyed being an ass so much....that is ..whether to get it on PC (bad character) or 360 (good character)

There aren't many other games I can think of, where your moral choices are affected so much, or ones that I've played in recent times...but it now has me wondering If I should revisit some of my older games and play through as the badass. Skyrim didn't really do the moral thing too well.

ShadowHearth

The only games, which nailed moral choise system - witcher series.

I hate any of the games where you have to go good or bad all the way. Games pushed you in to boarders, which you can't go over, because you decide to go on way. If you go the way you would do it, then all gets messed up and you losse on perks from bouth sides.

So here you go. Witcher is the only game which is "grey" . not good or bad, you are just in ****y situation and it depends from you how you will get away from it. A lot of times by thinking that you doing good, you actually doing something very bad, just because you did not put more thought in to it.

The only game which had proper moral system. All bioware and Bethesda stuff is a joke compared to witchers world.

penev10

I usually go for the good option as it seems more of a challenge. Being a d!ck is usually pretty easy.

KOTOR did have some good choices where you could flip to the darkside at certain plot points, morality really works in the Star WArs universe because theres that constant darkside thing in the background.

Fallout 3 was a bit more ambiguous but still handled it well with the various stats unlocking options which added a nice other aspect to it.

Mass Effect 2 was just stupidly polar though and I didnt feel it lent anythign to the game.

Sisko

ShadowHearth nailed it. I only ever played the Witcher 2 but so far, for me the "moral choices" in that game are best I've seen. Because there is no right answer. Each choices is almost as equally good and bad at the same time.

You didn't pick one and think "oh I wanna be the good/bad guy." As its not like that at all. Each choice when it comes up you'd be like "oh bollocks" as its genuinely a tough call. It's brilliant done tbh. I highly recommend it those who've not played it to try it out for this reason!

The ending of ME2 was interesting as imo what some may see as the "renegade" ending was largely the most logical , and reasonable choice. Where as the "good guy" choice was completely Disneyland "everything is good and will always work out perfectly no matter what."

A lot of people didn't even seem to notice this, but ultimately the "good guy" choice is pretty nuts in that it gambles with the lives trillions of people.

I didnt see a lot of the choices in ME2 as pure good guy or bad guy, one is a lot of time way too goodie too shoes and unrealistic and the others were more gritty but sometimes went way too nuts in that no one would follow you anywhere in the galaxy if you did that ****.

I played it to be as gritty yet believable as possible which largely meant a lot of renegade choices a decent amount of middle ground choices and a decent few paragon choices.

Temptamperu

I play good then bad then thats the game for me.

I really like I am Alives system, where there is no scale just your own decisions.

Sir Digby Chicken Caesar

witcher 1 for me.. was very early in the game and I ran into a situation (wont say for spoilers). it seemed .. not innocent enough, but it seemed harmless enough. nothing with any consequences later on so I made a choice and walked away.
a chapter or two later in the game I was in a bar fighting someone and after the fight I overheard a snippet of conversation about a farmer who had been murdered as a result of the decision i'd made earlier in the game (indirectly). Now it wasn't a major plot point, i never met the farmer and I dont think I ever met the people from the earlier event again either.. but it really made me stop for a minute and realise that my actions in the game had consequences and that really goes through the entire witcher series.
more than a few times in witcher 1 and 2 i'd be presented with a moral dilemna and walk away from the computer to make a cup of tea while I tried to think what I oughta do. I spent 20 minutes in witcher 2 over one particular decision, mulling it over. even after I made my tea and finished it I was staring at the screen thinking... it was just so... unbioware

unbioware is now a compliment.

SeantheMan

This has just sealed the deal on my own dilemma , that witcher /2 will be the next single player games I play.
Was only debating it in the other "too many games" thread, that I've never given them a chance.

J. Marston

Temptamperu wrote: »

I play good then bad then thats the game for me.

I really like I am Alives system, where there is no scale just your own decisions.

Same here. A goody two shoes playthrough and an unmerciful prick playthrough. Fairly basic way of playing it but I don't really like sitting on the moral fence.

SeantheMan

Most games aren't worth 2 full playthroughs though, especially if they are long, and definitely not straight after completing it first time

Hercule Poirot

Fable 3 has decent choices, at the very start you have to make one of the toughest desicions I've ever had to make in any game ever. A friend of mine who also had that desicion delayed a bit too long and the desicion was made for him, which is a new one for me.

pixelburp

My problem with moral choices is that they're nearly always tied in with some sort of reward/punishment system against the player's stats or inventory, which simply neuters any sense of actual morality; turning it into a pragmatic decision on profit and loss, rather than good vs. evil, or even a decision based on an emotional engagement. Of course the average player is going to play the douchebag if you tell him/her they'll get a bigger lasersword as a result.

A perfect example was the much-touted (back in '07 anyway) morality of Bioshock 1. Gamers were asked to kill or save the Little Sisters, with a reward to your stats depending on the choice. Saving them gave a lesser reward in the short-term, but you gained long-term gifts. Killing the Sister had an opposite result. So as great as the writing was in trying to form an emotional connection with the residents of Rapture - and still to do this day it's a classic of its kind - by coupling a reward system with the morality one, I found the Little Sister segments simply became a gameplay choice, not a one of emotion.

The Bethesda RPGs suffer the same problem. After a while playing Skyrim, I stopped 'being' a human as such, and simply became a pragmatic quest-whore who dipped into every quest line, no matter how contradictory (in terms of morality) they appeared to the last one. So when I last left the game, I was the Master Thief picking pockets, Merciless Assassin in worship to a God of Death, Defender of the Empire, and no matter how psychotically I behaved, eventually asked to save the world. I also appeared to be a great prospect for marriage. Why did I do all this? Because any appeals to my sense of morality were weighed against a material gain. Perform Hideous-Act-X to get a better sword? Sure, it's not like anything I do has any real effect. Bounties could be squashed, town guards bribed. Jesus, the crimes against Humanity I committed for the Daedric lords...

The Witcher was certainly a good example of how to do a morality system properly. There didn't seem to be any material gain to my decisions, but they all had ramifications to the world & its citizens. And unlike the above examples, all my choices were emotional ones, born from (sometimes) sketchy information. Whilst I didn't finish the game & can't comment too much, I liked how most choices felt spur of the moment - that I merely made a passing choice in a small context, not always having all the facts; and I certainly wasn't told the outcomes either. A stark contrast to most games where they tend to give you - in detail - the background & results of every possible choice (yes Deus Ex: Human Revolution, I'm looking at you).

Ultimately, what defines the morality of a game is not the choices you're asked to make, but the outcome and consequences you're forced to live by. And this doesn't happen via a different cutscene or an alternative reward to your inventory for being the nice-guy: a proper 'moral' game should be about creating an emotional connection with the player so that if they make a 'bad' choice - going against their gut or their conscience - that the game has the balls & maturity to make you feel ashamed for taking that path. It shouldn't be about increasing or decreasing a gameplay mechanic, it should be deeper than that. And that's where the traditional formats of good scripting and good characterisation should come in.

ShadowHearth

i think the moral of the story - go get witcher games ya peasants!!!

PC gamers have no excuse!
Console gamers will get witcher 2 in april!

ghostchant

I normally play as a good character, except in fable 2, where I went around slaughtering everyone. Anyone who hung around long enough still enjoyed my farting marathons though. Then they had to die.