You Gonna Be Good Or Evil?

[Hamshank]

My problem is how this system works is there isn't any ambiguity. You get 3 choices, the clearly good choice, the clearly bad choice, and maybe a neutral choice. There's no craftsmanship, why can't these choices be choice A , B, C? Where the most rational choice is usually the best choice or where A is good but it's not so overtly shown to be. Instead of creating moral conflict there are people who say, "I'm going to be a saint and do all the obviously good things." I think that's a huge failure that the Mass Effect and really every series has fallen to. Real leadership isn't about good or evil, it's about maximizing successful thinking and even if they really are trying to do a good or evil thing they're not putting the player in control, they're giving them a good/evil script.

How many times do you stop reading the choices and make sure you pick the good choice so you get another good bonus? There's a reward for being strictly good or strictly evil. Anyway, I don't think Starcraft 2 is going to get so into it and Raynor seems like a complicated character, kinda like Mal Reynolds from Firefly

[Sarov]

Hey, in the ME games you get to punch people in the face and knock them out, be incredibly rude and get away with it. That was the fun part for me. But as for StarCraft, I'm not sure. It sounds like you get the option of doing evil things - like getting artifacts over saving colonists - but not to the same degree as Mass Effect; evil choice of mission vs evil action (punching people in the face, killing people in badass ways)/evil dialogue/etc. Unless I get to punch some people in the face and be a real asshole, I'll probably just have to wait and see.

That's what I don't like about Mass Effect. You have the neutral option, the 'evil' option, and the 'good' option. I want a variety of those. I want to have some choice. Do I shoot him in the face? Knock him out? Or insult him to the point where he attacks me and then I just kick his ass?

[Blazur]

First I'm hearing about this. Always been a fan of moral dilemmas in a video game. And typically in these cases the easiest path is usually the path of evil.

[DemolitionSquid]

The Problem with the Mass Effect wheel is you're given stat bonuses for following one path. Wheras with say, Dragon Age, you have a lot more choices all the time and the benefit to your character is minimal, while the benefits or drawbacks to your story are pretty huge.

[Hamshank]

"And typically in these cases the easiest path is usually the path of evil."

You're right, in Mass Effect. Where is the calculating evil? Why is it just solving the problem faster? I guess that's why it's called intimidation, right?

[Blazur]

"And typically in these cases the easiest path is usually the path of evil."

You're right, in Mass Effect.

I'm also thinking of games like Fallout 3 and Black & White 2. It's so much easier going around stealing from everybody, killing people that get in your way, or bashing everything in with a boulder than it is choosing the path of righteousness. Also it's usually more fun

[DemolitionSquid]

I think it all comes down to that famous idiom, "as a ruler is it better to be loved or feared?"

[HydraHydra]

Evil, of course

[Jabber Wookie]

The whole morality of character gimmick is a pretty big fad these days in video games. It even has a presence in RDR.

To be honest, while I dont think this would work with a game like SC where there are multiple characters
with very distinct personalities, I would like to see more games like GTA 3
where the protagonist is a silent observer of the characters around him/her. It works well in Zelda, too.

[Sarov]

I'm also thinking of games like Fallout 3 and Black & White 2. It's so much easier going around stealing from everybody, killing people that get in your way, or bashing everything in with a boulder than it is choosing the path of righteousness. Also it's usually more fun

That's the thing. It's always easier to be evil than it is to be good. Which is why I give kudos to people who are actually good and not just because of 'it's the right thing to do'. They have a much harder time than evil people.

Same with Dungeons and Dragons. The DM I used to play with favored evil. It was pretty cheap because he didn't implement laws in the sense that yes, if you kill you will have to face the executioner's block for example. Good people had it harder because it was pretty much like there were no good people even though there were paladins and good-aligned clerics in every town. People would be like, "I'm so good at this game" and I would say, "Trying being good. See how hard that is!"

I think it all comes down to that famous idiom, "as a ruler is it better to be loved or feared?"

Very true.