Plenty of games have moral choice systems nowadays and in some ways it's a good thing for storytelling, especially in RPG games. It helps to have some kind of marker telling you whether you are a saint or satan depending on how you behave in the game and for the most part it's fair... if you rescue orphans from a burning house then you are good but if you laugh and roast marshmellows on their smoking corpses then you are clearly evil.
But there are those times, when we get positive or negative points where we feel like either:
A. The point alignment depending on the action should have been the other way
B. It shouldn't have effected your morality alignment whatsoever.
I'll give an example of what I mean.
In Mass Effect 2 my Shepard was having a conversation with Tali, at one point she casually drops in a potential interest in Shepard and my Shepard was still being faithful to Ashley, her picture still prominently sitting on his desk, and as a result politely turned Tali down.
Suddenly I'm staring at 2 renegade points earned for apparently not having feelings for Tali. I honestly don't see why this had to effect my alignment at all, I told Jack and Miranda similarly that I wasn't interested and it didn't give me bad points then, only with Tali. If anything I should have gotten positive points for not being swayed into being unfaithful.
In any case it wasn't a very renegade way to turn someone down, the real renegade way to say I wasn't interested would have been to laugh at the thought and walk away insulting her surely. Not just politley saying I don't have feelings.
True it's not that big of a deal and true, two renegade points isn't so bad but I just think that it was moral alignment effecting.
Likewise when I played Fable 2 and there was a section where there are some starving prisoners and you have the option to either deny them food or give them food at the cost of your experiance points, why does the latter earn positive points? Because the fact is, food or not they are never leaving this cell. They are still going to starve, giving them food is only going to drag out the process.
So the only consequence of me helping them in the short term is that they have longer to starve to death in the long term.
Again I know I'm thinking about it too much but again that's sort of the point of this thread. Are there any moral choices in games that you can think of that effect your alignment inb a positive or negative way that in your own personal opinion should have been the opposite or even not been alignment effecting at all?
But there are those times, when we get positive or negative points where we feel like either:
A. The point alignment depending on the action should have been the other way
B. It shouldn't have effected your morality alignment whatsoever.
I'll give an example of what I mean.
In Mass Effect 2 my Shepard was having a conversation with Tali, at one point she casually drops in a potential interest in Shepard and my Shepard was still being faithful to Ashley, her picture still prominently sitting on his desk, and as a result politely turned Tali down.
Suddenly I'm staring at 2 renegade points earned for apparently not having feelings for Tali. I honestly don't see why this had to effect my alignment at all, I told Jack and Miranda similarly that I wasn't interested and it didn't give me bad points then, only with Tali. If anything I should have gotten positive points for not being swayed into being unfaithful.
In any case it wasn't a very renegade way to turn someone down, the real renegade way to say I wasn't interested would have been to laugh at the thought and walk away insulting her surely. Not just politley saying I don't have feelings.
True it's not that big of a deal and true, two renegade points isn't so bad but I just think that it was moral alignment effecting.
Likewise when I played Fable 2 and there was a section where there are some starving prisoners and you have the option to either deny them food or give them food at the cost of your experiance points, why does the latter earn positive points? Because the fact is, food or not they are never leaving this cell. They are still going to starve, giving them food is only going to drag out the process.
So the only consequence of me helping them in the short term is that they have longer to starve to death in the long term.
Again I know I'm thinking about it too much but again that's sort of the point of this thread. Are there any moral choices in games that you can think of that effect your alignment inb a positive or negative way that in your own personal opinion should have been the opposite or even not been alignment effecting at all?
