The Problems with Good-Playthrough in Many RPGs... Your Thoughts?

[Harthwain]

The better question is 'why wouldn't you want both' given that this is very early in the game and you have only 3 heroes at the time, and without metagame knowledge you won't know that the game is going to shower you with champs later on. Which means it doesn't boil down to alignment, because taking the non-aligned option is very clearly the superior choice.

Because you will be limited to 12 seats anyway and it's better to get extra loyalty to reach more damage/APs thresholds as soon as possible. That said, I agree there is some utility in taking them both, because you will hit the loyalty cap with one of them anyway at some point. But generally you are going to lean fully into a particular side.

I strongly disagree. There is no communist who is fully committed to real life. There were people forced to work by circumstances, but for them it was just a stopover (or a sad necessity if they failed to make a revolution). The only "work" of a communist is revolutionary struggle.

Marx? A lazy philosopher.
Lenin? Haunted aristocrat.
Stalin? Bandit and a bad poet.
Che? He never wanted to be a doctor.
Mao? The son of a rich peasant who didn't want to work.
Kim Il-sung? Professional revolutionary.
Fidel? Same.

Not sure what you're trying to get at. What do you mean by "communist who is fully committed to real life"? What do you mean by "people forced to work by circumstances"?

Also, I am not sure why you forget the common man. It was the mass popularity of communism that made it a threat for the established order and a way for political activists to get into power. In fact I'd argue that people became communists BECAUSE they "had a real life" (if I understand correctly what you meant by that). Just look at the working conditions and the economic situation at the time. Communism wasn't created out of thin air and it got so popular for a reason. Then it stopped being popular when people realized the idea simply doesn't work and things won't get better, but people in power didn't want to let go of all the power it allowed them to grab so they forced people to live in that system (literally building walls to keep people in there and brutally supressing any dissent).

 

[Grampy_Bone]

Morality in all games is a farce anyway; e.g. Dragon Age Inquisition has a "My family disowned me for being gay" plotline and none of the options are "lol, yeah."

No game lets you actually go against modern progressivism.

 

[KD6-3.7]

Would be nice to have a game in which every character, player included, was a absolute cunt.

 

[BosanskiSeljak]

Even when the "good" or "best" path is the harder one mechanically, there's still a failure it making it a hardship for you. Even something as simple as making it costly for you, there's either way too much money available for the game so it doesn't make a dent, or you really don't need money for anything else and you never find yourself in a situation where you think about choosing to be good or save it for yourself.

Surprisingly, Dragon Age: Origins did it quite well, especially as a BioWare game. There are the typical issues, for example being able to travel to the Mage Tower, do their mission, then come back and cure Connor for the "golden ending" to that quest while the Desire Demon simply stops attacking the town. For the most part it's really well done where the goodie-good option gets you nothing more than a really grateful voice acting performance.

 

[0sacred]

The frame of reference of what's 'good' should be entirely decided by the setting, not by armchair philosophers (that means you, Codex). Usually, anything that benefits order and quality of life for the people in a setting will be considered good. You can mix this up a bit by having the dominant faction be authoritarians who are into order but otherwise morally reprehensible, but then again they will probably ultimately rule by force, making their appeal to order entirely cosmetic.

I really liked the NWN approach to choices, often the reward would simply be that you gained points that would determine your alignment in the long run. And of course alignment wasn't just something cosmetic.

 

[Iucounu]

People who are relentlessly honest and diligent tend to struggle, but they do so because it's the right thing to do (or they're just cowards who are afraid of the law).

People tend to lie or spout half-truths simply because in general you get punished for being honest, and I don't mean that in a retarded "We live in a society" way. I mean that one might be hesitant to tell the truth out of fear of either negative consequences or social rejection, that they'll be judged harshly for honestly expressing themselves so they choose to put on a facade of being someone they're not.

You don't always have to say what you think to be honest though. I think the reason honest people struggle is more because lying often gives the liars an advantage, at least among the majority of people that are too naïve to see through the lies.

 

[Iucounu]

Now I was reminded of certain evil Skyrim side quests, where you do get rewarded with special loot by doing evil deeds. There is no in-game reward whatsoever for not being evil. Are such evil quests uncommon in other RPGs than Skyrim?

 

[Just Locus]

[...] I think the reason honest people struggle is more because lying often gives the liars an advantage [...]

That's precisely what I mean, I wasn't referring to people who put up a more sociable, respectable front as that's more just being polite rather than lying.

 

[std::namespace]

maaan... i thought the newfag larpers around here recycle the topics every 2 years...
but lifting shit from 2002...?

 

[cretin]

Morality in all games is a farce anyway; e.g. Dragon Age Inquisition has a "My family disowned me for being gay" plotline and none of the options are "lol, yeah."

No game lets you actually go against modern progressivism.

Isn't it funny, I've never even played or looked at DAI and yet I isolated that exact scenario in my post. That's how common this shit has been and is in videogames.

 

[Nortar]

Would be nice to have a game in which every character, player included, was a absolute cunt.

Colony Ship.

And as an example of a game that makes your life harder for making the "tought but right choices" there's Vampyr.
Not drinking people's blood halts your vampire power growth.
Not that it affects much in the end, though.

 

[NecroLord]

It has been proven time and again that people like their heroes.
So why take that away from players? Be the good guy that saves the day and gets the girl...
Besides, evil choices and evil paths are pretty bad in most rpgs, pure cringe, almost written by edgy teens. It does not explore the idea and ramifications of evil and evil intent and goals.
Who will the villagers love more? The selfless Lawful Good character who kills the orcs who threaten their village and asks for no reward, or the rampaging Chaotic Evil brute who steals their shit and rapes their daughters?

 

[REhorror]

Even Rogue Trader rewards being the generic goody two shoes too much.

Dogmatic still has to go through high and low to keep the Faith, but it's still incredibly satisfying.

It has been proven time and again that people like their heroes.
So why take that away from players? Be the good guy that saves the day and gets the girl...
Besides, evil choices and evil paths are pretty bad in most rpgs, pure cringe, almost written by edgy teens. It does not explore the idea and ramifications of evil and evil intent and goals.
Who will the villagers love more? The selfless Lawful Good character who kills the orcs who threaten their village and asks for no reward, or the rampaging Chaotic Evil brute who steals their shit and rapes their daughters?

The problem is when Lawful Good cannot kill the orcs because killing orcs is evil, and you must somehow talk with them and be their BFF instead.
Lawful Good strays from their original definition (a man who believes the law and wants to do good) into the writer pet where killing is always bad (unless it's those dastardly fascist humans/elves/dwarves/"good" races).

 

[NecroLord]

Even Rogue Trader rewards being the generic goody two shoes too much.

Dogmatic still has to go through high and low to keep the Faith, but it's still incredibly satisfying.

It has been proven time and again that people like their heroes.
So why take that away from players? Be the good guy that saves the day and gets the girl...
Besides, evil choices and evil paths are pretty bad in most rpgs, pure cringe, almost written by edgy teens. It does not explore the idea and ramifications of evil and evil intent and goals.
Who will the villagers love more? The selfless Lawful Good character who kills the orcs who threaten their village and asks for no reward, or the rampaging Chaotic Evil brute who steals their shit and rapes their daughters?

The problem is when Lawful Good cannot the orcs because killing orcs is evil, and you must somehow talk with them and be their BFF instead.
Lawful Good strays from their original definition (a man who believes the law and wants to do good) into the writer pet where killing is always bad (unless it's those dastardly fascist humans/elves/dwarves/"good" races).

"Good is not nice".
Perhaps you have heard of that?

 

[REhorror]

Even Rogue Trader rewards being the generic goody two shoes too much.

Dogmatic still has to go through high and low to keep the Faith, but it's still incredibly satisfying.

It has been proven time and again that people like their heroes.
So why take that away from players? Be the good guy that saves the day and gets the girl...
Besides, evil choices and evil paths are pretty bad in most rpgs, pure cringe, almost written by edgy teens. It does not explore the idea and ramifications of evil and evil intent and goals.
Who will the villagers love more? The selfless Lawful Good character who kills the orcs who threaten their village and asks for no reward, or the rampaging Chaotic Evil brute who steals their shit and rapes their daughters?

The problem is when Lawful Good cannot the orcs because killing orcs is evil, and you must somehow talk with them and be their BFF instead.
Lawful Good strays from their original definition (a man who believes the law and wants to do good) into the writer pet where killing is always bad (unless it's those dastardly fascist humans/elves/dwarves/"good" races).

"Good is not nice".
Perhaps you have heard of that?

I do, but perhaps the RPG writers need to learn that instead?

Good is almost simultaneously with nice in RPG.

Hell, some games even reward you BAD boy point for saying bad/insulting things.

 

[Maxie]

This thread makes me realize how rare this type of RPGs are. I'm referring to the type of RPGS that make good' moral choices more punishing/demanding mechanically but more rewarding narratively and vice versa for the 'bad' ones. Aside from Pathological, Mask of the Betrayer and Rogue Trader I can't think of any other examples. Every time a game does this it makes both choices more satisfying and often met with critical acclaim here on the codex at least.

Btw, just finished Wasteland 2, I like that there is one area - titan canyon - whose problem is not easy to resolve in a moral way (if a good outcome even exist), and the morally good choice is not the most obvious choice, in fact the choice that appears to be harmful short-term - disarm the nuke and eliminate both factions that vying for control the canyon, as a result, the area lost any semblance of order left and become really unsafe for traders to pass through - is actually good long-term - the rangers can come to the area later and restore order there without charging a high toll or blow up the canyon like what the previous 2 factions would do - and vice versa, wish more RPGs do this, because it forces players to use their brain if they want to leave some positive impact on the game world instead of just choosing the supposedly-nicest option available like a brainless goody-two-shoes.

Can you guys recommend to me other games that make you work and think harder when trying to do good like the examples above? I know RPGs are supposed to be a form of escapism for many, but I personally wouldn't mind if more RPG devs become less averse to making the good playthrough in their game more complex and difficult like real life - in real life, most of the time, you don't get parades and magic swords for doing the right thing, and its not always easy - in lieu of the usual power fantasy crap. What about you?

The problem lies in your mind only. Video games are heroic stories of an underdog's struggle, rags to riches etc., and as such have no business promoting anything else than heroism, kindness, and optimism.

 

[REhorror]

This thread makes me realize how rare this type of RPGs are. I'm referring to the type of RPGS that make good' moral choices more punishing/demanding mechanically but more rewarding narratively and vice versa for the 'bad' ones. Aside from Pathological, Mask of the Betrayer and Rogue Trader I can't think of any other examples. Every time a game does this it makes both choices more satisfying and often met with critical acclaim here on the codex at least.

Btw, just finished Wasteland 2, I like that there is one area - titan canyon - whose problem is not easy to resolve in a moral way (if a good outcome even exist), and the morally good choice is not the most obvious choice, in fact the choice that appears to be harmful short-term - disarm the nuke and eliminate both factions that vying for control the canyon, as a result, the area lost any semblance of order left and become really unsafe for traders to pass through - is actually good long-term - the rangers can come to the area later and restore order there without charging a high toll or blow up the canyon like what the previous 2 factions would do - and vice versa, wish more RPGs do this, because it forces players to use their brain if they want to leave some positive impact on the game world instead of just choosing the supposedly-nicest option available like a brainless goody-two-shoes.

Can you guys recommend to me other games that make you work and think harder when trying to do good like the examples above? I know RPGs are supposed to be a form of escapism for many, but I personally wouldn't mind if more RPG devs become less averse to making the good playthrough in their game more complex and difficult like real life - in real life, most of the time, you don't get parades and magic swords for doing the right thing, and its not always easy - in lieu of the usual power fantasy crap. What about you?

The problem lies in your mind only. Video games are heroic stories of an underdog's struggle, rags to riches etc., and as such have no business promoting anything else than heroism, kindness, and optimism.

Or in other words... stupid shit that the author/writers approve of.

If I make a RPG some days, you can bet I will put in a beggar where they ask for all your shit, and you have the option to give it all.
But you will get nothing out of it, save for an achievement to prove how stupid you are.

 

[Maxie]

This thread makes me realize how rare this type of RPGs are. I'm referring to the type of RPGS that make good' moral choices more punishing/demanding mechanically but more rewarding narratively and vice versa for the 'bad' ones. Aside from Pathological, Mask of the Betrayer and Rogue Trader I can't think of any other examples. Every time a game does this it makes both choices more satisfying and often met with critical acclaim here on the codex at least.

Btw, just finished Wasteland 2, I like that there is one area - titan canyon - whose problem is not easy to resolve in a moral way (if a good outcome even exist), and the morally good choice is not the most obvious choice, in fact the choice that appears to be harmful short-term - disarm the nuke and eliminate both factions that vying for control the canyon, as a result, the area lost any semblance of order left and become really unsafe for traders to pass through - is actually good long-term - the rangers can come to the area later and restore order there without charging a high toll or blow up the canyon like what the previous 2 factions would do - and vice versa, wish more RPGs do this, because it forces players to use their brain if they want to leave some positive impact on the game world instead of just choosing the supposedly-nicest option available like a brainless goody-two-shoes.

Can you guys recommend to me other games that make you work and think harder when trying to do good like the examples above? I know RPGs are supposed to be a form of escapism for many, but I personally wouldn't mind if more RPG devs become less averse to making the good playthrough in their game more complex and difficult like real life - in real life, most of the time, you don't get parades and magic swords for doing the right thing, and its not always easy - in lieu of the usual power fantasy crap. What about you?

The problem lies in your mind only. Video games are heroic stories of an underdog's struggle, rags to riches etc., and as such have no business promoting anything else than heroism, kindness, and optimism.

Or in other words... stupid shit that the author/writers approve of.

If I make a RPG some days, you can bet I will put in a beggar where they ask for all your shit, and you have the option to give it all.
But you will get nothing out of it, save for an achievement to prove how stupid you are.

you've chosen the wrong website for your virtue signalling

 

[REhorror]

This thread makes me realize how rare this type of RPGs are. I'm referring to the type of RPGS that make good' moral choices more punishing/demanding mechanically but more rewarding narratively and vice versa for the 'bad' ones. Aside from Pathological, Mask of the Betrayer and Rogue Trader I can't think of any other examples. Every time a game does this it makes both choices more satisfying and often met with critical acclaim here on the codex at least.

Btw, just finished Wasteland 2, I like that there is one area - titan canyon - whose problem is not easy to resolve in a moral way (if a good outcome even exist), and the morally good choice is not the most obvious choice, in fact the choice that appears to be harmful short-term - disarm the nuke and eliminate both factions that vying for control the canyon, as a result, the area lost any semblance of order left and become really unsafe for traders to pass through - is actually good long-term - the rangers can come to the area later and restore order there without charging a high toll or blow up the canyon like what the previous 2 factions would do - and vice versa, wish more RPGs do this, because it forces players to use their brain if they want to leave some positive impact on the game world instead of just choosing the supposedly-nicest option available like a brainless goody-two-shoes.

Can you guys recommend to me other games that make you work and think harder when trying to do good like the examples above? I know RPGs are supposed to be a form of escapism for many, but I personally wouldn't mind if more RPG devs become less averse to making the good playthrough in their game more complex and difficult like real life - in real life, most of the time, you don't get parades and magic swords for doing the right thing, and its not always easy - in lieu of the usual power fantasy crap. What about you?

The problem lies in your mind only. Video games are heroic stories of an underdog's struggle, rags to riches etc., and as such have no business promoting anything else than heroism, kindness, and optimism.

Or in other words... stupid shit that the author/writers approve of.

If I make a RPG some days, you can bet I will put in a beggar where they ask for all your shit, and you have the option to give it all.
But you will get nothing out of it, save for an achievement to prove how stupid you are.

you've chosen the wrong website for your virtue signalling

What virtue signaling?

 

[Maxie]

This thread makes me realize how rare this type of RPGs are. I'm referring to the type of RPGS that make good' moral choices more punishing/demanding mechanically but more rewarding narratively and vice versa for the 'bad' ones. Aside from Pathological, Mask of the Betrayer and Rogue Trader I can't think of any other examples. Every time a game does this it makes both choices more satisfying and often met with critical acclaim here on the codex at least.

Btw, just finished Wasteland 2, I like that there is one area - titan canyon - whose problem is not easy to resolve in a moral way (if a good outcome even exist), and the morally good choice is not the most obvious choice, in fact the choice that appears to be harmful short-term - disarm the nuke and eliminate both factions that vying for control the canyon, as a result, the area lost any semblance of order left and become really unsafe for traders to pass through - is actually good long-term - the rangers can come to the area later and restore order there without charging a high toll or blow up the canyon like what the previous 2 factions would do - and vice versa, wish more RPGs do this, because it forces players to use their brain if they want to leave some positive impact on the game world instead of just choosing the supposedly-nicest option available like a brainless goody-two-shoes.

Can you guys recommend to me other games that make you work and think harder when trying to do good like the examples above? I know RPGs are supposed to be a form of escapism for many, but I personally wouldn't mind if more RPG devs become less averse to making the good playthrough in their game more complex and difficult like real life - in real life, most of the time, you don't get parades and magic swords for doing the right thing, and its not always easy - in lieu of the usual power fantasy crap. What about you?

The problem lies in your mind only. Video games are heroic stories of an underdog's struggle, rags to riches etc., and as such have no business promoting anything else than heroism, kindness, and optimism.

Or in other words... stupid shit that the author/writers approve of.

If I make a RPG some days, you can bet I will put in a beggar where they ask for all your shit, and you have the option to give it all.
But you will get nothing out of it, save for an achievement to prove how stupid you are.

you've chosen the wrong website for your virtue signalling

What virtue signaling?

didn't you mumble and screech like a pimple-faced edgy teenager just a post above about how stupid the options I argue for are?

 

[Nortar]

The selfless Lawful Good character

That's the OP's point as I get it - if you are rewarded for being good, it's not selfless.
It's like that old chestnut "people who are incapable of violence are not peaceful, they are harmless".

 

[REhorror]

This thread makes me realize how rare this type of RPGs are. I'm referring to the type of RPGS that make good' moral choices more punishing/demanding mechanically but more rewarding narratively and vice versa for the 'bad' ones. Aside from Pathological, Mask of the Betrayer and Rogue Trader I can't think of any other examples. Every time a game does this it makes both choices more satisfying and often met with critical acclaim here on the codex at least.

Btw, just finished Wasteland 2, I like that there is one area - titan canyon - whose problem is not easy to resolve in a moral way (if a good outcome even exist), and the morally good choice is not the most obvious choice, in fact the choice that appears to be harmful short-term - disarm the nuke and eliminate both factions that vying for control the canyon, as a result, the area lost any semblance of order left and become really unsafe for traders to pass through - is actually good long-term - the rangers can come to the area later and restore order there without charging a high toll or blow up the canyon like what the previous 2 factions would do - and vice versa, wish more RPGs do this, because it forces players to use their brain if they want to leave some positive impact on the game world instead of just choosing the supposedly-nicest option available like a brainless goody-two-shoes.

Can you guys recommend to me other games that make you work and think harder when trying to do good like the examples above? I know RPGs are supposed to be a form of escapism for many, but I personally wouldn't mind if more RPG devs become less averse to making the good playthrough in their game more complex and difficult like real life - in real life, most of the time, you don't get parades and magic swords for doing the right thing, and its not always easy - in lieu of the usual power fantasy crap. What about you?

The problem lies in your mind only. Video games are heroic stories of an underdog's struggle, rags to riches etc., and as such have no business promoting anything else than heroism, kindness, and optimism.

Or in other words... stupid shit that the author/writers approve of.

If I make a RPG some days, you can bet I will put in a beggar where they ask for all your shit, and you have the option to give it all.
But you will get nothing out of it, save for an achievement to prove how stupid you are.

you've chosen the wrong website for your virtue signalling

What virtue signaling?

didn't you mumble and screech like a pimple-faced edgy teenager just a post above about how stupid the options I argue for are?

Nope, I think I said it clearly.

Do you have a problem with what I said?

 

[just]

meet me outside

 

[Conan]

the entire concept of doing what's right, whats moral, in spite of yourself, in spite of your best interests or what would materially benefit you and yours, comes directly from Christianity.

Yeah, no.

 

[Maxie]

This thread makes me realize how rare this type of RPGs are. I'm referring to the type of RPGS that make good' moral choices more punishing/demanding mechanically but more rewarding narratively and vice versa for the 'bad' ones. Aside from Pathological, Mask of the Betrayer and Rogue Trader I can't think of any other examples. Every time a game does this it makes both choices more satisfying and often met with critical acclaim here on the codex at least.

Btw, just finished Wasteland 2, I like that there is one area - titan canyon - whose problem is not easy to resolve in a moral way (if a good outcome even exist), and the morally good choice is not the most obvious choice, in fact the choice that appears to be harmful short-term - disarm the nuke and eliminate both factions that vying for control the canyon, as a result, the area lost any semblance of order left and become really unsafe for traders to pass through - is actually good long-term - the rangers can come to the area later and restore order there without charging a high toll or blow up the canyon like what the previous 2 factions would do - and vice versa, wish more RPGs do this, because it forces players to use their brain if they want to leave some positive impact on the game world instead of just choosing the supposedly-nicest option available like a brainless goody-two-shoes.

Can you guys recommend to me other games that make you work and think harder when trying to do good like the examples above? I know RPGs are supposed to be a form of escapism for many, but I personally wouldn't mind if more RPG devs become less averse to making the good playthrough in their game more complex and difficult like real life - in real life, most of the time, you don't get parades and magic swords for doing the right thing, and its not always easy - in lieu of the usual power fantasy crap. What about you?

The problem lies in your mind only. Video games are heroic stories of an underdog's struggle, rags to riches etc., and as such have no business promoting anything else than heroism, kindness, and optimism.

Or in other words... stupid shit that the author/writers approve of.

If I make a RPG some days, you can bet I will put in a beggar where they ask for all your shit, and you have the option to give it all.
But you will get nothing out of it, save for an achievement to prove how stupid you are.

you've chosen the wrong website for your virtue signalling

What virtue signaling?

didn't you mumble and screech like a pimple-faced edgy teenager just a post above about how stupid the options I argue for are?

Nope, I think I said it clearly.

Do you have a problem with what I said?

obviously I do, you've dismissed what I said as 'stupid shit that the author/writers approve of,' in some juvenile stunt which surely made sense to you alone