Get Rid of Morality Systems

[Zantos]

The morality system ME uses shouldn't be removed, it just needs a little rehashing.

What it does is define everything as good or evil, a black and white choice. Secondly it assumes all scenarios have a good option and an evil option. COnsider the two following scenarios, one is borrowed from someone else and one I just thought up now so there's probably a better one. Spoilers for the 6 people in the known universe who haven't played it or been told the story.

So the first example (borrowed) is Legion's loyalty mission. At the end you have to choose between the paragon option of removing the geth free will and reprogramming them all to believe what you believe, or the renegade option of wiping them out. Sorry to everyone who wants to play a purely good lawful character but fuck that! Brainwashing was chosen as a paragon option because it's what, less bad than killing them? They should both be renegade. It's a scenario engineered to be a difficult choice so why not go all the way and make it so there is no good way out? In real life, if you brainwashed a bunch of people and your defence was "at least I didn't kill them" then that shit wouldn't fly, so why should it in this? I'm sure there are plenty of examples ingame that this could be applied to.

Secondly, look at the final decision. The destruction of the collector base. Paragon is blow it up, renegade is keep it and hand it over to cerberus. Yes we know that once Martin Sheen has the technology he'll probably use it to murder some Asari orphans or something, but on the whole it means at least someone would have advanced technology to fight reapers with. And it isn't your fault he was the only major power actually interested in the reaper threat. So weigh up the points, rather than some arbitrary number of paragon or renegade points for each, have a mixture. You get some paragon points for destroying the station, but you get some renegade points for the several billion extra people that probably die due to being severely short on advanced tech. You get renegade points for handing the collector base to the illusive man, but paragon for at least having someone with bigass anti-reaper guns.

I think changes like that would improve the moral choice system at least a little, and make it more flexible since you can earn paragon and renegade points at the same time and thus get more dialogue options on the side of the spectrum you aren't really playing on.

 

[Trolldor]

The way they are implemented restricts role playing. Instead of playing your own character, you are playing at most two or three preset characters.
Most moral bars are shitty evil/good splits, and while Bioware does it better, that's like saying they're better at being a leper for losing more appendages.

How about instead of limiting speech options if our Paragon/Renegade score isn't high enough, we simply leave all the options there for the player to choose? Be a jerk with a heart of gold, or a good guy who makes bad decisions. Anything in between also works, but it is all infinitely better than a couple of presets that only work if you dedicate every speech option to them (Mass Efect 2 I'm looking at you)

Instead of railroading us onto one path with no deviation, give us broader options. The irony of the morality system is that it only reflects the morals the developers want, not what you might feel. So your character isn't so much yours as it is what the devs want your character to be.

EDIT
Sorry, more info. KEEP Moral Choices, just get rid of the Morality SYSTEM.

No.
Sometimes a black and white morality system can be fun.
Don't use a morality system when you claim your game is about choice though.

 

[BodomBeachChild]

New Vegas got the morality kinda right. I still hated how killing specific people was good karma when indeed I murdered the bastard. But the overall choices for what NV was to become was perfect. All the routes to the future of Vegas are all kinda shitty for the place, but some less than others. My only issue with the way you are asked to handle everything is you cannot outsmart the game. I tried to screw everyone over and (in my own head) bring a real independent Vegas and one of my games has no ending because I farked with he quest lines too much.

The Witcher though nails it. "What do you think is the better idea/lesser evil" (Kill a werewolf since you are a monster killer? Or spare him and see what the outcomes of kill it would net." Or you can chose the "I'm a Witcher. I'm neutral as hell" option.

 

[Outright Villainy]

Morality slider bars, yeah, I'd agree, they're rubbish.

I kinda like faction systems, which New Vegas did pretty well. It allows much more replay value since not all factions are aginst each other, but you still have to make choices of who you'll side with, what group most appeals to you. I think it's the best way of having a metered system for decisions at any rate, since it's only guaging people's reactions, and not the overall morality of those actions. Personal morality meters are bullshit.

 

[Soviet Heavy]

Alpha Protocol, best morality system ever.

The thing I liked about AP was how you had three flavours of Douchebag, so you could choose any response, and it would still seem consistent with your character.

 

[Biodeamon]

I could do without a morality system as long as i get to do moral choices. However it is fun to see how much of a jerk/paladin you are. However some games do well with morality systems like how charecters react towards you or what powers you unlock. however it does tick me off with Mass Effect 2 where you need to be complete jerk to be an even more jerk or vice versa.

 

[Onyx Oblivion]

I like what they did in the first dragon age where you weren't told what the good/bad action was and had to decide for yourself what to say

I was basically good. Except for the whole Dalish camp slaughter. And making deals with demons. And killing people for money.

Okay...Yeah. Dragon Age has great morality since I can do all of that on one characters and not be punished for basically towing the neutral line.

 

[Racecarlock]

Ok yahtzee, we all know it's you under that mask, quit dicking around and just admit it.

In all seriousness. I do agree to get rid of the morality system. Just replace it with a benefit/cost choice system. The needs of the few versus the needs of the many. These make for much much more interesting choices instead of "Oh, I'll go for the good option because it'll increase my goodosity and unlock the angel weapons".

 

[artanis_neravar]

Allow me to be a contrarian for a moment and present a way that moral systems might make sense. Lets look for a moment at Knights of the old republic and say you played the game making decisions that gave you light side points. Towards the end of the game you begin to see that certain actions or dialogue trees are absent or grayed out to you. These dialogue tree options and choices have to do with the exact opposite perspective from that you have established your player is based on your actions earlier in the game (as a light side hero you can no longer choose dark side actions). So basically, the game has prevented you from radically changing your characters personality based on your own decisions earlier in the game. Lets pretend that the original star wars trilogy was a very long game. At the end, there might be an option for luke to kill vader and fall to the dark side, kinda like in Kotor. But if you played through the game the exact way the movie went, it wouldn't make any sense story wise, or in other words within the narrative created by your choices earlier in the game, for that to happen.

Not true, you don't know whats going on in the characters head, maybe I've been playing nice until I am in the position to do the most damage, and in the original trilogy that would be about when Luke has the option to kill Vader. Imagine if at that moment Luke reveals his true self kills Vader and the emperor and takes over the empire.

 

[Avatar Roku]

Morality is too conceptual to be measured by stats and graphs

Which is why a system like the ME2 one doesn't work. I need X many points to pull Spectre authority over some dumbass? And only if I'm evil? Why not pull rank and get it without being a jackass?

I've heard it fan wanked to be that the bars measure your reputation. As in, do good actions, you get the reputation as a good guy, so people won't take you seriously if you threaten them, etc. Still stupid, though.

Alpha Protocol, best morality system ever.

The thing I liked about AP was how you had three flavours of Douchebag, so you could choose any response, and it would still seem consistent with your character.

not douche bag, ponce, and the morality system was fucking amazing. There's an amazing amount of different things that happen based on what you do.

If only the entire game had been polished, I feel like that would be the litmus test. It was such a good game.

 

[penguindude42]

Would all of you dorks b*tching about morality systems please play Ultima IV: Quest of the Avatar thus expiriancing(sp?) one that works!?

You'll win more favor points that way.

-TOM

 

[Avatar Roku]

Morality is too conceptual to be measured by stats and graphs

Which is why a system like the ME2 one doesn't work. I need X many points to pull Spectre authority over some dumbass? And only if I'm evil? Why not pull rank and get it without being a jackass?

I've heard it fan wanked to be that the bars measure your reputation. As in, do good actions, you get the reputation as a good guy, so people won't take you seriously if you threaten them, etc. Still stupid, though.

Alpha Protocol, best morality system ever.

The thing I liked about AP was how you had three flavours of Douchebag, so you could choose any response, and it would still seem consistent with your character.

not douche bag, ponce, and the morality system was fucking amazing. There's an amazing amount of different things that happen based on what you do.

If only the entire game had been polished, I feel like that would be the litmus test. It was such a good game.

God that game was so good though, and it was more polished than Oblivion and Fallout 3 IMO and those games get praise out the ass. I think it froze on me 2 twice, the rest was kinda iffy controls but I still got through it first play through recruit, no points in stealth.

Well, for me, it seemed quite unpolished. Froze all the time, laggy, etc. Now, some of that is that my computer is old, but not all of it. Still a fucking amazing game, regardless.

Also, no points in Stealth? I could never do that, I love sneaking too much. Power to you.

 

[Kevin Lyons]

I feel the game that most represents this is Fable 3. *SPOILERS* *BUT THE GAME HAS BEEN OUT FOR SO LONG THAT I DONT REALLY CARE* Once you become the king, you have to make all of these epic morality choices that decide the outcome of the kingdom blah blah blah. BUT the "GOOD" choices end up leading to the downfall of the kingdom while the "EVIL" choices lead to everyone being saved. Now how can that really work??

 

[Indecipherable]

The Morality system of ME2 is simply a replacement to putting skill points into Persuade/Intimidate. That in and of itself is a worthy goal; in every single RPG I've played I've felt is mandatory to 'max out' your conversational skills. When there is something so crucial that it is nigh-unto essential it simply becomes a point sink in one form or another and I applaud attempts to get rid of it. However, ME2 didn't do it the right way.

The way I originally felt Paragon/Renegade to be was that the Paragon upheld every individuals rights, for better or worse, while the Renegade upheld a 'greater good', possibly at the expense of an individual. A Paragon might occaisionally suffer a greater loss than the Renegade because the bigger picture was greater than an individual's. Likewise a Renegade might sometimes sacrifice the life/freedom of innocents in order to maintain the prosperity of the system as a whole. It was not a simple dichotomy of Good/Bad. Unfortunately Renegade became synonymous with asshat bully who goes around and intimidates people, often for no practical purpose other than to show how big a jerk he can be to the whole galaxy. Gone is the Utilitarian Shepherd ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Utilitarian ) and now there's just Angry Shepherd.

Perhaps the removal of Persuade/Intimidate skills as a whole is the best way forwards, and leave fully fledged dialog choices to decide what happens. By that I mean having the entire sentence written out that Shepherd is to say and provide a meaningful number of responses, instead of obscure abbreviations down to things like 'Okay' that end up with you somehow punching a pregnant woman in the stomach. When you say the right thing you simply get the right outcome, it isn't influenced by a stat that you have been pumping up in the background.