First of all, I'm one of those weirdos who actually likes his role playing games to have, you know, role playing, so bare with me. I'll start the discussion.
One of the common complaints about video game morality is that it's too black and white - kill an old lady or save her cat, as a trivial example. Now, I can see how this could draw complaints to some degree, but I don't see what's intrinsically wrong with such a system. It's not unrealistic: You can either be helpful or do something hideously evil. This often applies to real life. No, it doesn't offer a complex moral choice: It clearly isn't meant to do so. No, it doesn't offer a great array of choices: That's par for the course: Grass grows, birds sing, and video games don't offer the freedom of D&D. Get over it. The only thing I don't get is why this particular morality system even exists. What's the point, besides making money? The only idea I have is that it might please those who want to play evil. More on that later.
Now that I've defended a morality system nobody likes, I'll have a go at one people seem to like: The one in Mass Effect and its sequel. I'll be the first to admit I hate Mass Effect, but I'm going to put that aside for now. Maybe I shouldn't have been so quick to assume it was compacted fecal matter disguised as a disc (or two), but what do you want from me? Last time I gave Bioware a chance I got Dragon Age: Origins. Anyway, putting away my Bioware hate for a moment: The morality system in Mass Effect 2 is worse than pointless, it impairs role playing greatly. Players are actively rewarded for picking one type of conversation option consistently. When talking to people, I don't get to think "What would my character do?" I think "What will give me more blue things?" This really, really, sucks. I should be able to role play however I want without my character being gimped for not always picking the conversation option at the top of the wheel. For a game that spends so much time in conversation, it sure seems reluctant to let players have fun conversing. I don't understand this system either: All it does is hurt role playing. I won't even credit it for giving morally ambiguous choices: The same choices could be represented without a morality system. In fact, it would be better if the game didn't tell the player which choice was good and which one was bad: The Garrus mission would have been downright awesome without the stupid morality system making my choices for me. Yes, I did refer to them as good and bad - Paragon is Stupid Good (also a bit Lawful Stupid) and Renegade is Chaotic Neutral. As such, I picked Paragon because evil is for noobs and Chaotic Neutral is for newbs.
The system in Infamous was both similar and dissimilar to the system in Mass Effect: Like the one in Mass Effect, consistency gives a mechanical benefit. Unlike Mass Effect, it doesn't suck. Sure, it demanded consistency and it was pure black and white, but these two elements blended into something that... wasn't pretty, but it was better than a sharp stick in the eye. It's the choice between hero and villain, and you get powers that represent your choice. In Mass Effect, it's the choice between having fun and not, and if you have fun, your end game suffers greatly.
Now that I'm done communicating ideas poorly, I'll ask you to do the same: What do you think about morality systems in video games?
Too long, didn't read version: Strategically insert your best Mass Effect insults in the above text. Also, what do you think about morality systems in video games?
I think morality choices are stupid in games where you are playing AS someone. For example, if in a game, I had to make my own character, name him the way I wanted, and give him his own physical features, I would expect to make my own decisions. I could put myself in his shoes.
If I was playing as a character in a shooter who used to work for the FBI, I would rather let the game play out itself. There's nothing wrong with that, and I think moral choices are very overrated in some games.
Also, I think they only work when the choices affect the storyline. For example, in Bioshock 2, whether you save or harvest the sisters affects what happens in the ending of the game.
If I just have to make a choice whether to kill someone or save someone, and the only difference is more points or less points, then moral choice would be completely pointless.
think morality choices are stupid in games where you are playing AS someone. For example, if in a game, I had to make my own character, name him the way I wanted, and give him his own physical features, I would expect to make my own decisions. I could put myself in his shoes.
People don't do that simply because it would require a new "world", u'd need a simulation with u being born, living out your life as u intended, in other words, u'd need to consider EVERYTHING that happened in that world... everything
Which is why it must be translated into a different person, because really the game u want is like having 100 different games.
