It's kind of a cheap tactic for emotional relevance to make you kill a character that has been developed into something likable.Monkeyman8 said:
I can't do this...
- Thread starter Insanum
- Start date
Recommended Videos
yeah, i had the airport trouble in Modern Warfare 2 also, but then i just sucked it up and killed the swat guys.
also in mass effect i was going for the renegade achievement, but on virmire i didnt make the salarians job harder, i was just TOO nice, and thus took the paragon bonus...which sucked cuz i didnt get it at the end, i couldnt get enough
also in mass effect i was going for the renegade achievement, but on virmire i didnt make the salarians job harder, i was just TOO nice, and thus took the paragon bonus...which sucked cuz i didnt get it at the end, i couldnt get enough
MiracleOfSound said:
IIRC, it's made out that helping the slaver leader guy is the best choice, since he loves his daughter and actually DOES plan to help the slaves. And the other dude wasn't going to treat the baby well and only cared about his own self, it seemed. That part was really well made though, an awesome example of,"Do the ends justify the means?"
It just depends on what kind of game I'm playing. If I'm playing GTA 4 I like to run people over and launch them out of their cars for giggles. When I play some RPGs I usually get into character and play the good guy, though I do make separate files for an evil play through. As for Portal, I don't get why people hesitate to incinerate the companion cube. The instant the game prompted me to burn it I happily obliged.
Zaeed's mission in Mass Effect 2: at one point you need to choose between chasing down Zaeed's old nemesis and murdering him, or rescuing a group of colonists trapped in a burning building. On the one hand, if you help Zaeed kill his nemesis before he gets away, you get his loyalty - potentially giving you an edge in the final mission - and an achievement. That's an in-game reward and a meta-game reward. If you save the colonists (and it was Zaeed's fault they were even in danger adding an element of responsibility), you get jack shit, save a few Paragon points.
I sat there staring at the dialogue wheel for like ten minutes. Finally I decided I couldn't reconcile abandoning the colonists. Zaeed nearly killed me over it, but at least my Shepard could look himself in the mirror.
Oh ho, Dragon Age, though. I played that game as an evil mage with a single goal: gather as much power as possible, no matter who I had to fuck over, backstab, murder, leave to die, trap forever in a state of limbo, or curse to possession by demons in order to do so. If the game had let me usurp the throne, I'd have done it in a heartbeat.
That game does a really good job rewarding you for being ruthless. I cut a fiery swath through Ferelden.
Being evil is easy in fantasy games because I feel compelled to punish everyone for their horrendous faux-British accents. My girlfriend got me to try Fable 2 briefly, and it infuriated her that every time a character started talking to me, I would ask her, "Am I allowed to kill that person?"
Never had trouble with Little Sisters, either. I found them overacted and unconvincing as little girls, with all their loud proclamations of "Mister Bubbles!" looping way too often. It never feel like I was doing something evil to a person - it simply felt like I was taking a cartoonishly unsubtle 'evil option' in a videogame.
It really comes down to how believably the characters of a world are presented.
I sat there staring at the dialogue wheel for like ten minutes. Finally I decided I couldn't reconcile abandoning the colonists. Zaeed nearly killed me over it, but at least my Shepard could look himself in the mirror.
Oh ho, Dragon Age, though. I played that game as an evil mage with a single goal: gather as much power as possible, no matter who I had to fuck over, backstab, murder, leave to die, trap forever in a state of limbo, or curse to possession by demons in order to do so. If the game had let me usurp the throne, I'd have done it in a heartbeat.
That game does a really good job rewarding you for being ruthless. I cut a fiery swath through Ferelden.
Being evil is easy in fantasy games because I feel compelled to punish everyone for their horrendous faux-British accents. My girlfriend got me to try Fable 2 briefly, and it infuriated her that every time a character started talking to me, I would ask her, "Am I allowed to kill that person?"
Never had trouble with Little Sisters, either. I found them overacted and unconvincing as little girls, with all their loud proclamations of "Mister Bubbles!" looping way too often. It never feel like I was doing something evil to a person - it simply felt like I was taking a cartoonishly unsubtle 'evil option' in a videogame.
It really comes down to how believably the characters of a world are presented.
In Baldur's Gate 2, I couldn't take Keldorn with the party. Ever.
As a good guy, I just couldn't keep him from his family again, after what happens in his personal quest. This meant giving up the best weapon in the game and a super-powerful NPC, but I still couldn't do it.
As a bad guy... why would I want a racist paladin around?
As a good guy, I just couldn't keep him from his family again, after what happens in his personal quest. This meant giving up the best weapon in the game and a super-powerful NPC, but I still couldn't do it.
As a bad guy... why would I want a racist paladin around?
Fire hell ring of death was called infernal wrath, Fire heaven death ring was called divine fury.J03bot said:
OT: ON fable:TLC I played the morality in the order of good, evil, neutral. On games like oblivion I usually just play the quests and factions that I want without thinking about the morality of it though.
I couldn't be mean to Aeris. Ever.
Honestly, games are usually better when this happens. If choices have an affect on you on a personal, moral level, it means that they are that much more meaningful. Sure, I CAN just remember that they are video games, and ignore any input from my moral frame of reference, but honestly, what's the point then?
Honestly, games are usually better when this happens. If choices have an affect on you on a personal, moral level, it means that they are that much more meaningful. Sure, I CAN just remember that they are video games, and ignore any input from my moral frame of reference, but honestly, what's the point then?
I play the vidya to break from reality (lol, ESCAPISM), so I leave ideas like morality, ethics, and common decency behind.
Yes, I like to call this giving morality and emotion to games. Its the same with fiction books, just in case you are ever in a interview with Bill O'Rielly. He may try to bring up that its dumb how videogames can have emotion, just say it makes more sense than a book.
I always go through as the good guy the first time who beats up assholes, and then thats about it, I will mess around as the bad guy for a while, but mainly stay good as an angel.
I always go through as the good guy the first time who beats up assholes, and then thats about it, I will mess around as the bad guy for a while, but mainly stay good as an angel.
I know what you mean. In Assassin's Creed 2, sometimes you hear the guards just talking about their lives, and I feel really bad if I kill them. In those situations I try to disarm them and knock them out with hand-to-hand combat.
In Bioshock and Bioshock 2 I always chose the 'good' options. I tend to in most games.
Although I never had any mercy for the bandits in Fable 2. Strange that.
In Bioshock and Bioshock 2 I always chose the 'good' options. I tend to in most games.
Although I never had any mercy for the bandits in Fable 2. Strange that.
I'm replaying WindWaker right now, and actually put myself in the mindset of Link as he ventures around the islands. That mindset, in case you're wondering is a determined progression, where he decidedly solves puzzles (albeit a bit faster than one might think, thanks to experience) by deciphering his surroundings. But in playing, I have come to what must have been a very hard thing for him to do: He must ask Makar and Medli to give up their normal lives as they are and get them to spend the rest of their existence as sages for temples to gods that are still hopefully flitting about somewhere. In playing these parts, I'm imagining him hesitant to approach them, but knowing he must, as they must, to stop Ganon/Gannondorf's plan from succeeding. I can imagine him not saying thanks, because how do you thank someone for giving up their life so that you might succeed? That's a hard goodbye, man.
You know, I played Portal a bit after everyone had finished with the whole "The Cube is Forever" thing, so I was all stoked to meet the cube. Once GLaDOS told me it couldn't talk, I set it on the ground, turned the audio up, and listened for something. Indeed, I concurred, the Cube could not talk. In fact, it could do nothing more than sit there. There was no emotional attachment to the cube, and so, coming to the button that would trigger it's demise, I looked at it once, as I picked it up, and promptly dropped it to hell. I felt no remorse for it, and felt no emotions contrary to wanting to open the door. It wasn't even a Wilson from Cast-Away kind of thing, either. I read Rat-man's odd notes scrawled on the walls, and they too seemed to be the chaotic ramblings of a man so deprived of sanity that he started suffering PTSD, and attached a personality to a what basically amounted to a stepping stool that could block energy balls. Honestly, I felt worse for knocking over the turrets.TheTaco007 said: