You are hereBlogs / Swag's blog / Finding The Gray Area In Moral Choices
Finding The Gray Area In Moral Choices
In this Gamasutra feature, moral choices in games, in this case Bioshock 1+2 and Fallout 3, are examined to see if any moral ambiguity or clarity can be achieved.
From the article:
"While the original BioShock was a critical smash for Irrational Games, critics did realize that the moral choices that were so central to the game were black and white -- either a player would choose to be good or evil. Kill a little sister or let her live. But game designers are realizing that there is a grey area that resides in between good and evil."
In regards to Fallout 3 (found here in the full feature):
"I think, when all was said and done, we were happy with the mix Fallout 3 offered. There were some clear good/evil paths, and the player could make those easy moral decisions, and sort of try to get those karma-specific level titles, or achievements, or be treated a certain way by the various factions. But there are also plenty of situations where it's much more morally nebulous, and the player is left wondering, 'Is this the right thing, or the wrong thing?' I think the ending of The Pitt DLC sort of exemplifies that."
As the article mentions, I believe that certain games only offer the extreme ends of moral choices, like Fallout 3. I am currently trying to play a somewhat evil character, but I am finding it very difficult to do so. Most of the time the pure evil choices are either completely illogical, or just plain ridiculous. Why should I kill a whole family instead of helping them out, when they can give me money in return? I could kill them without provocation, but in terms of gaming that would be boring. If I just told everyone to screw off, where would the fun be in that?
In contrast I last played as a neutral character, but that was even harder because, as previously explained, the choices are all at the extremes (typically at least).
I think developers should make moral 'choices' more ambiguous and less black and white. Technically speaking, the choices you make could be leading you to a 'evil' alignment, but maybe it would be best not knowing (much like in real life). Although as mentioned above, the ending to the DLC "The Pitt" was quite morally ambiguous.
-
- Swag's blog
- Login to post comments
- 259 reads
I don't typically play single-player, story-driven, heavy-in-character-development games.
When I only have an hour to play and want my pwning fix, I gravitate towards games where the "path" is simply "kill other team". And the toughest moral choice is "shoot in nuts, or stab in face?".
Sometimes it can take time to find the pwn in a game. A great example of this is Fallout 3, which I have been whoring on this site since Blackwalt left. Hell just last night I probably spent a good hour reading and talking to a bunch of stone faced NPCs. But I like staring at stuff in that game, from an art perspective, so it's ok.
Sometimes people also don't want to think when playing a video game, much the same way as when watching a movie they want to see Bruce Willis blowing up crap and don't want to think about the deep, intricate, aspects of suburbia like in the recently featured swag deal of the day Mulholland Dr. (incorrectly posted as 19.99, when it was actually 11.99)!
But there are some single player games that just let you kill stuff without thinking.