Morality is about good and evil. Right and wrong. At least, it is in most video games. Games with clear systems of moral choice allow us to be sure of which is which, something that is clearly problematic in real life, or even in more complex fictional narratives. Unfortunately, the view shown in these types of games seems to be more in line with Saturday-morning cartoons than the great works of literature and film. And while attempts have been made to create more complex moral commentary, dual good/evil morality systems often get in the way of a nuanced experience or character. There are the good guys and the bad guys, and there are good actions and bad actions.
Morality systems built around extremes of good and evil create certain problems. Choosing between good and evil, or good, evil and neutrality in some cases, requires that these choices are clearly flagged. This results in a system where when you're good, you're very very good, and when you're bad, you're horrid. Extremely polarised dialogue choices make your character seem preachy and naive when good, or they make you into a petulant child when evil: seemingly badass threats fizzle when you're repeatedly told that you're going to have to do the quest the way everyone else does, no matter how scaawy you are. if you decide to be neutral, the game probably won't like you keeping it up for long.
 |
| Not going to score any points with this lady. |
Because the mechanic is often points based (even if this is not transparent), getting all the points is an enticing goal for players. Doing all the quests and talking with all the people in the game is often rewarded through points granted within the morality system, and this means that maximising one extreme is probably going to be considered an indicator of success. Sometimes, indecisive players will be actively penalised because the middle ground is numerically the same as having earned zero morality 'points'. Because of these factors, bonuses are seldom assigned for neutral alignment. This is especially frustrating in games like the Knights of the Old Republic games, where some of the most interesting party members are neutral, but the game seems to ignore the possibility that a player may like to be the same. This means that these RPGs are less about the RP and more about the G -- be consistent, and you're playing the game. The temptation to maximise one alignment means that your character becomes a boring type, rather than a complex, personal character.
Statistics have shown that the majority of players, when given the choice, choose to be good. This happened in both Fable and the Mass Effect series (spoilers). This could be because people are socially conditioned to prefer good options: being nice is... nice. Another likely reason is the way that games with morality systems reward players for their choices. it usually works like this: evil choices are usually rewarded with money and stuff, and good players are rewarded with praise. Some of you may argue that the loot is better, but people in general seem to like the approval more. Being chided is not something they enjoy. It also doesn't help that people don't enjoy the idea that being good makes you radiantly pretty, while being evil just makes you look like you've got lupus.
The narrative, however, has some requirements, and telling the story that the writer(s) want to tell you in a game can often interfere with this black/white moral division. Given a context, knowing whether an action is ultimately good or evil is unclear. Luckily, the design of the game often conveniently helps you to tell the difference. In the otherwise excellent game Red Dead Redemption, the needs of the story (the titular Redemption in particular), as well as the character of John Marston as he is portrayed in dialogue and cutscenes conflict with the very underdeveloped 'honor' system. You can earn an outlaw outfit and rob and kill everyone you meet. You can steal horses. You can even cheat at poker (gasp!). NPCs will display unease around you if your 'honor' is low, but Marston will be visibly uneasy about performing morally questionable acts in the story missions. Marston's Redemption is happening, whether you want it to or not.
I'm not criticising the idea of good/evil morality systems, but where these systems badly interfere with decent characterisation and a player's moral choice being about morals rather than rewards, some thought is needed. Next time, I'll be discussing morality systems that involve variables other than good and evil, and see if they offer any improvements on the good/evil system.
Part 1
Part 3
Part 4
Part 5
No comments:
Post a Comment