Poll: In games with morality systems, which extreme would you choose?

[MrCalavera_v1legacy]

I usually end up playing as goody two-shoes. I find doing evil things in games hard unless i commit my character to be a dickbag. And i feel like going the evil route on first playthrough is generally, not a good idea. Being randumbly ebil on the other hand does nothing to me, and ruins my immersion. So, i usually avoid Evil routes, unless they're really entertaining.

In a lot of RPGs and TellTale games, I have a self-imposed "What Would Sterling Archer do?" challenge. Basically, I pick whatever option Archer would do, which usually leads the character (me) make selfish, dickish moves. In The Wolf Among Us, I had a habit of stealing money from crime scenes and then avoiding to pay for things where possible - "I wish I could offer some money to help" I tell a struggling pole dancer, right after I looted her club's safe.

WWAD is my modus operandi in Alpha Protocol.

 

[gsilver]

When I played Mass Effect 1, it was full Paragon
When I played Mass Effect 2, I used Cheat Engine to give myself a ton of both Paragon and Renegade points so that I could pick whatever seemed more appropriate in the situation.
While sometimes I felt like Shepard went way too far (like shooting a guy in the foot for being slightly annoying), I generally preferred that way of playing.

 

[WolfThomas]

Sarcastic > Good > Evil

If I can't be Archer levels of sarcastic (I not the Archer build is popular here). I'm basically Steve Rogers.

I do prefer when games let you determine your own morality rather than bind you buy a system like paragon/renegade. Playing state of decay recently I had two "good" characters, who were generally altruistic, they welcomed new members, aided allies and didn't attack neutrals. But their actual personalities were vastly different.

Ellis Washington (black gay male scientist) was basically a politician. He said whatever he had to, to win people over, he manipulated the emotions of fragile people, he bribed people, he blackmailed them. He was nearly universally adored by the shelter.

Teddy Johnson (white straight female builder) was my "boss *****" she bulldozed any opposition and wouldn't take excuses. She'd tell people to do their job and expect it done well. No one rebelled but their was a lot of grumbling. But her regime avoided an attempted rape, a murder and a suicide that Ellis' hadn't.

 

[wings012]

If Dragon Age 2 did something right, it was allowing you to be a smarmy asshole as opposed to good/evil or nice/angry.

Problem with a lot of games is that while they allow you to be evil, they don't really reward it. Being a chaotic dickhead means people hating you and getting locked out of quests and the like. And just by the virtue of accepting and finishing a random arse quest, even though you were only in it for the reward - you automatically are considered good and get karma points or whatever.

In most games with morality systems, I tend towards what the game deems as 'goodness' since that the route that doesn't lock me out of shit.

My Shephard though, while full Paragon had quite a high bar of Renegade.

 

[MeatMachine]

I always go with the path that is most rewarding. Seeing as how most games are absolutely terrible in their execution of morality systems, it makes the "Jesus" path the least restrictive. Stealing and murdering might get you more cash in the moment, but it will also invariably remove you from accessing 80% of sidequests, merchants, or dialogue options.

Besides, if you walk the world as Jesus, you can ALWAYS change your mind and murder everyone you've ever met. Once you commit to that path, though, you are stuck with it.

TL;DR: Always choose righteousness until you have nothing more to gain - this is hardly a "moral" position for being a "good guy" in games.

Amorality is the name of my game. I'll end up doing the right thing...but there might be a trail of bodies along the way.

My template is this guy:

McCree's flashbangs are OP as shit though.

 

[Trunkage]

I always go with the path that is most rewarding. Seeing as how most games are absolutely terrible in their execution of morality systems, it makes the "Jesus" path the least restrictive. Stealing and murdering might get you more cash in the moment, but it will also invariably remove you from accessing 80% of sidequests, merchants, or dialogue options.

Besides, if you walk the world as Jesus, you can ALWAYS change your mind and murder everyone you've ever met. Once you commit to that path, though, you are stuck with it.

TL;DR: Always choose righteousness until you have nothing more to gain - this is hardly a "moral" position for being a "good guy" in games.

Amorality is the name of my game. I'll end up doing the right thing...but there might be a trail of bodies along the way.

My template is this guy:

McCree's flashbangs are OP as shit though.

Swooped. I'm the same. I choose the morality that let's me see the most content. Which usually means good

 

[vashthblackseed]

I remember playing FO3 and just fucking with the karma system. Every quest I picked the good option if available. Outside of quests I was the vile scourge of the wastes... it always made me laugh when 3dog would come on the radio and be like, "Look out folk, that scourge of the wastes out there saving puppies and building orphanages again."