Poll: Moral choice systems in games

[obehave_wan]

I know that there have already been discussions on this topic, but I wanted to do a poll on it.

Personally, I agree with everything Yahtzee said in his InFamous review, as well as his Bioshock review. I don't feel the need to expand on his opinions, so just watch his videos if you haven't already.

 

[Danzaivar]

I love 'em. Just give us a neutral choice too some times maybe?

 

[MBFCPresident]

They really do need more options and varied effects on their respective game worlds.

 

[Knight Templar]

Well heres a video I think you should watch if you are intrested in this issue: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jlOXAtPvMDk
Looks like a ZP rip-off but its not really.

 

[Fat Hippo]

In a good Rpg they're indispensable, as without them, there is no real depth. Of course they need to be done well (I don't like Biowares new take on it much: There's only good or bad, unlike also chaotic and lawful like in DnD) but otherwise, the feeling of consequences for your actions often goes lost.
Of course, it'd be ridiculous if a shooter like CoD or Crysis had it, so it really depends on the game.

 

[XJ-0461]

They'd need about four different options in each given situation for them to truely work.

 

[That_Guitarist_Guy]

Like what wanderfreak said, they don't affect the story, they pick and ending. It would be nice if what you did ACTUALLY DID AFFECT THE STORY! Like some random generator for what you did actually made something important happen. You killed someone. Okay then, you can't do this, but you can do this, this, or this now. Oh you did this? Well now you can do that, that, that, or that... You guys get the meaning.

Or if they gave you choices between the Goods, the Neutrals, and the Bads (Chaotic G/N/B, etc.). THEN we would see some progress in the Moral Choice systems. Personally I like the random generator thing that actually shapes what happens to you. I think Oblivion tried something like this with the Knights of the Nine expansion, but it didn't work because it didn't really affect anything other than the "Oh now you can't use your super good sword/mace/armor now? Poor you, go kill bandits till you get a set that is about the same thing, only not enchanted..."

 

[obehave_wan]

I'm not opposed to the concept, I just don't think a single game has done it well, and I would be fine with the whole idea going away. In all of these games, there is no point doing anything other all good or all bad, so it gives the player no more choice than normal.

 

[Andy_Panthro]

I like the idea of them, but they are often just binary choices between Saint and Devil.

So, more please, but please try harder!

 

[toasterslayer]

i want one in the third gears of war...lol.

 

[similar.squirrel]

Indifference. I neither particularly like nor dislike them.

Neutral-Neutral?

 

[Pyre00]

Instead of one "Good and Evil" bar, there should be several bars with two traits that are the opposite of each other on either side, for example, Hedonism---Stoicism

"Good" and "Evil" are incredibly limiting words. What if I want to be the "Doing Good for Profit" guy? Or an overlord who oppresses people not out of greed or sadism but misanthropy?

 

[AdamAK]

I don't particularly like them, because I don't enjoy playing a game twice doing the exact opposite. Take Black & White, for example. I have always played as a good God, and I always try to keep everyone as happy as possible. I tried playing it as an evil God, but I simply didn't enjoy it. While the good/bad thing didn't change the outcome of the game, the play style was completely different and for me unenjoyable. In a game where there would be different endings, it would become impossible for me to really complete a game ( - seeing every ending - ) without playing through it in a way I simply don't enjoy.

 

[Sev72]

If they are done well then they are great, all too often however they end badly...so it depends.

 

[Mad Maniac with axe-firing chainsaw]

This depends entirely on the game. Fable 2 was fertile ground... I didn't find the system itself too bad... what matters is the choices. Fallout 3 generally had good middle ground, as did KOTOR... KOTOR excelled by sometimes having a slightly good or evil version of everything too. You could have a choice to do something slightly evil in a quest for a small bonus, or do something worthy of a cross between Genghis Khan and Stalin either for a bigger bonus or for the hell of doing something incredibly evil. (never let me play a moral choice game when I'm bored... it will end badly... VERY badly... for all involved.) The more flexibility the player has, the more fun a moral choice system will be, and this is the core of making a good moral choice system.

I also think the "absolute morality" system needs scrapping. What I'd like, is for you to instead earn reputation. Not overall reputation, but rep with different factions, or even different people! Fable 2 made a promising start on this but didn't develop it enough. (You really need to be able to start up random conversations with NPC's for the individual rep to work at its best, but what if you saved someone from, say, bowerstone? People in bowerstone (And only Bowerstone) would come to respect you more. Equally, get a reputation for saving wandering traders and you'll find that wandering traders will be eager to give you good deals, or even giving you free stuff if your rep is high enough with them. Say in Fable 3 or even if there is one 4, wars can start. And say that Bowerstone fights Bloodstone. You could become a hero to either side, but the side you spend your time slaughtering is going to hate you for it for all eternity. This is, I think, a potential future for moral systems.

 

[LaughingTarget]

The choices need to be less binary. There need to be far more choices and there also need to be unintended consequences to them.

 

[FinalGamer]

I actually like morality choices in games but only if they're there for a good reason, like in The Suffering which made it integral to the story.

 

[xHipaboo420x]

The morality systems we have in games at the moment are deeply rudimentary. They operate in absolutes (YOU KILLED MAN / YOU LET MAN LIVE, usually) which, as most philosophers will tell you, is not how morality works. In games like KoToR and Fallout3 morality is treated almost as a second XP, accumulated through often unpredictable outcomes. What we need in games is relative morality, where the game will take in to account your behaviour over the course of events, rather than isolated incidents adding up to a predictable whole.

/pretention