So, I'm currently wrapping up my second play through of Dragon Age: Origins today, which is a great game by the way, but there is one thing about it all that bugs me:
It's still a black and white representation of moral choices.
BioWare's claim to fame was the introduction of moral choices that all floated in the grey area. No longer would a meter float in your character sheet, showing your status between Babysitter and Babyslayer. You're choices wouldn't just make you good or bad, they'd inflict consequences upon the world.
Bullshit.
Pull up you're list of characters. They can easily be described as the following:
(The characters following were all announced before release, there should be no spoilers. Unless you wanted to know nothing, in which case, quit reading.)
Good: Alistair, Wynne, Leliana.
Neutral: Wardog, Oghren, Sten.
Evil: Morrigan, Zevran.
Cool, scroll through your characters and find which group likes you more, using the relationship meters* at the base of their character sheet. Alistair, Wynne, and Leliana like you the most?
[small]*Read: Totally not a meter which shows the reflections of your moral choices.[/small]
Shit, looks like your a good character.
Games seriously need to cut this shit out. It's infuriating. After a multitude of conversations with my party members throughout the game, it becomes increasingly obvious that I'm being praised and/or ridiculed for my mercy towards others. However, to date, Dragon Age: Origins holds all my hopes for the future of morality choices, for one reason, and one reason only:
Yes. Oh, hell yes.
This is what I'm looking for. Drop the relationship bars, drop the plethora of gifts you can dump on your comrades, and focus on this. Hell, don't just focus on it, pick it up and run with it. Run with it until my geeky physique can no longer keep up with you!
For example, would it be such a surprise for certain members of your party to gather together and have a little discussion amongst themselves? "Hey, Khaine seems committed and all, but when he killed that city guard to gain entry to _________, I've grown concerned that he's losing sight of our interests as a group." Shortly after this discussion, you've once again killed an "innocent" to advance the goals of the group. Perhaps it occurred when you were pressing a noblewoman for information, something that her husband didn't take kindly to. Suddenly a fight breaks out, and you kill him in self-defense, or perhaps it was more than just "self-defense." That is up to you, of course, but the example holds.
When you return to camp afterwards, another discussion takes place, while you once again remain none the wiser. Just as your character goes to turn in, three or four of your party members approach you, and drop their unanimous decision in your lap:
"We think you're unfit to remain leader. We'd like to appoint ______, and have you step down."
At this point, a discussion (or argument) breaks loose. Things are starting to get rather heated, and many of your other party members join the fray. Some support you, some don't. As the debate progresses, you manage to sway some members over to your side, while others who formerly supported you begin to turn against you. Perhaps a member or two floats in the middle, unable to pick a side, or they even go so far as to disagree with both parties, and threaten to leave the group all together.
A multitude of things could happen from here:
1) The discussion is solved peacefully. You remain leader of the party, after agreeing to a few conditions put forth by the group. You press on with your quest, but now under the watchful eye of some of your companions.
2) The discussion leads to a break in the group. Some of your companions rally under your flag, while others rally under that of _____. Perhaps even a renegade or two decide to leave the party altogether and seek out their own destinies. For the remainder of the story you constantly run into the opposing group, always striving for a common goal. Perhaps a fight breaks lose, or perhaps it's just another chance to butt heads and once again you vie for the support of companions.
3) Your argument fails and you are forced to admit defeat. You fall in line under the new leader, whom now decides where you travel, who you do battle with, and what means you go to to see your final goal.
4) A fight breaks loose then and there. Considering who initiated the fight, their support may gain or suffer, but now you're playing for keeps. Those who fall in battle remain so, and only those who stand at the end can decide the future of the group. Perhaps the survivors attempt to save the few wounded they take pity on, or at best leave them under the care of a third-party.
There's an infinite number of outcomes, some which result in a good character, some which result in a bad, and a numerous number of choices which fall in between.
In my mind, this is what morality choice should mean. Constant conflict between you and your companions. Some believe in mercy for all, some wish only death upon all they see, but most lay somewhere in between. They have no issues with stealing, but don't abide you pressuring innocents for information. They believe you waste your time struggling to save the weak, but they aren't happy when you slaughter those same people to reach your goals.
It's a lot to ask for from a developer, but then again, is it really? My primary example, Dragon Age: Origins features some of the minimalistic basics to my visions, to my dreams. It's a long road, but its end is not unattainable. In fact, it is just within our grasp... we just need to make it happen.
----------
So much to cover here:
Did you like Dragon Age: Origins?
Do you feel BioWare finally reached the sweet spot of moral decisions?
Do you feel any game will ever reach the sweet spot of moral decisions?
What do you think of my example of a functioning moral decision system?
Has my example already appeared in a game? If not, is it attainable?
Discuss.
It's still a black and white representation of moral choices.
BioWare's claim to fame was the introduction of moral choices that all floated in the grey area. No longer would a meter float in your character sheet, showing your status between Babysitter and Babyslayer. You're choices wouldn't just make you good or bad, they'd inflict consequences upon the world.
Bullshit.
Pull up you're list of characters. They can easily be described as the following:
(The characters following were all announced before release, there should be no spoilers. Unless you wanted to know nothing, in which case, quit reading.)
Good: Alistair, Wynne, Leliana.
Neutral: Wardog, Oghren, Sten.
Evil: Morrigan, Zevran.
Cool, scroll through your characters and find which group likes you more, using the relationship meters* at the base of their character sheet. Alistair, Wynne, and Leliana like you the most?
[small]*Read: Totally not a meter which shows the reflections of your moral choices.[/small]
Shit, looks like your a good character.
Games seriously need to cut this shit out. It's infuriating. After a multitude of conversations with my party members throughout the game, it becomes increasingly obvious that I'm being praised and/or ridiculed for my mercy towards others. However, to date, Dragon Age: Origins holds all my hopes for the future of morality choices, for one reason, and one reason only:
Some party members disagree so strongly with your choices, that they turn and try to murder you.
Yes. Oh, hell yes.
This is what I'm looking for. Drop the relationship bars, drop the plethora of gifts you can dump on your comrades, and focus on this. Hell, don't just focus on it, pick it up and run with it. Run with it until my geeky physique can no longer keep up with you!
For example, would it be such a surprise for certain members of your party to gather together and have a little discussion amongst themselves? "Hey, Khaine seems committed and all, but when he killed that city guard to gain entry to _________, I've grown concerned that he's losing sight of our interests as a group." Shortly after this discussion, you've once again killed an "innocent" to advance the goals of the group. Perhaps it occurred when you were pressing a noblewoman for information, something that her husband didn't take kindly to. Suddenly a fight breaks out, and you kill him in self-defense, or perhaps it was more than just "self-defense." That is up to you, of course, but the example holds.
When you return to camp afterwards, another discussion takes place, while you once again remain none the wiser. Just as your character goes to turn in, three or four of your party members approach you, and drop their unanimous decision in your lap:
"We think you're unfit to remain leader. We'd like to appoint ______, and have you step down."
At this point, a discussion (or argument) breaks loose. Things are starting to get rather heated, and many of your other party members join the fray. Some support you, some don't. As the debate progresses, you manage to sway some members over to your side, while others who formerly supported you begin to turn against you. Perhaps a member or two floats in the middle, unable to pick a side, or they even go so far as to disagree with both parties, and threaten to leave the group all together.
A multitude of things could happen from here:
1) The discussion is solved peacefully. You remain leader of the party, after agreeing to a few conditions put forth by the group. You press on with your quest, but now under the watchful eye of some of your companions.
2) The discussion leads to a break in the group. Some of your companions rally under your flag, while others rally under that of _____. Perhaps even a renegade or two decide to leave the party altogether and seek out their own destinies. For the remainder of the story you constantly run into the opposing group, always striving for a common goal. Perhaps a fight breaks lose, or perhaps it's just another chance to butt heads and once again you vie for the support of companions.
3) Your argument fails and you are forced to admit defeat. You fall in line under the new leader, whom now decides where you travel, who you do battle with, and what means you go to to see your final goal.
4) A fight breaks loose then and there. Considering who initiated the fight, their support may gain or suffer, but now you're playing for keeps. Those who fall in battle remain so, and only those who stand at the end can decide the future of the group. Perhaps the survivors attempt to save the few wounded they take pity on, or at best leave them under the care of a third-party.
There's an infinite number of outcomes, some which result in a good character, some which result in a bad, and a numerous number of choices which fall in between.
In my mind, this is what morality choice should mean. Constant conflict between you and your companions. Some believe in mercy for all, some wish only death upon all they see, but most lay somewhere in between. They have no issues with stealing, but don't abide you pressuring innocents for information. They believe you waste your time struggling to save the weak, but they aren't happy when you slaughter those same people to reach your goals.
It's a lot to ask for from a developer, but then again, is it really? My primary example, Dragon Age: Origins features some of the minimalistic basics to my visions, to my dreams. It's a long road, but its end is not unattainable. In fact, it is just within our grasp... we just need to make it happen.
----------
So much to cover here:
Did you like Dragon Age: Origins?
Do you feel BioWare finally reached the sweet spot of moral decisions?
Do you feel any game will ever reach the sweet spot of moral decisions?
What do you think of my example of a functioning moral decision system?
Has my example already appeared in a game? If not, is it attainable?
Discuss.
