Morality in games: What do you choose?

[InvictusCobra]

So games (especially RPGs) have always had some morality choices between good or bad, the needs of the few/one or the needs of the many. I love it when there are moral choices to be made in games, even if they are basically transparent like in Bioware games , or more complex and grey as in the Witcher franchise. The first game with morality I ever played was the first Knights of the Old Republic,when I was in elementary school and back then I was a complete douche because: "Yeah, I can choke and use lightning like Darth Vader. I'm such a cool badass!"

However, around 7th grade I began hating the "evil" side of the moral compass and since then, I always aim to be the biggest paragon of virtue and kindness, due to various reasons. First, I love the gratification of helping others and bringing them joy; second, my life is already miserable enough, I don't want to see others suffer as well, third it sort of eases my own pain. Now, the interesting part is how this contrasts with reality. IRL I am a spiteful person towards those I don't like, extremely competetive to the point where I need to see others fail so that my victory has meaning and whenever people ask me to do charity or similar work, I shy away to my comfort zone.

I can understand how some may enjoy being an egotistical, maniacal villain for several reasons like taking out their stress on the game's characters, feeling all powerful and being able to squish the weak whilst they are strong, etc... but for me, I can't stand watching game characters suffer and it pains me greatly when I can't help a companion or NPC, or if I made the wrong choice, which is why in games like the Witcher I use choice guides on my first playthrough of a game in order to get the best result and so I can avoid anyone suffering. 

Some may agree with me, others like my friends call me a spineless White Knight faggot for doing it the way I do. Anyway, what type of moral choices do you prefer in games, binary or shades of grey ones? Good or Evil? Do they contrast with how you make similar decisions IRL? Why?

[Funyarinpa]

I usually can't bear being evil, so I usually go with the merciful, good etc. route. Sometimes, if I'm angry, I can do cruel stuff though.

[Shikomizue]

I always try to go with the good choices. Though, I do whatever I believe is right, and that might not be a 'good' option. I think there's a fine line between good and evil, but sometimes there really isn't.

[kaikeamorim12]

when first game I usually use the evil choices but everything depends on the situation

[Turnip Sensei]

Playing as jerkwad or homicidal maniac is only fun for so long, being generally nice is much more pleasant. But full-on paragon of virtue isn't that fun either, so I usually go with some kind of middle ground. Being good and nice to those who are nice, but not hesitating about using "evil" or questionable methods if situation calls it. Or if it concerns my companions and their safety. Friends before common good is usually how I choose. I also tend to do like Geralt; between evil and lesser evil, I rather don't choose at all.                                                    

Also playing strictly "good" or "evil" character defeats the purpose of the moral system in the first place, at least for me. Why even bother if you're only picking certain answers in the first place? 

[Flutterz]

I almost never do evil, that said when I played Pillars of Eternity I tried killing everyone for shits and giggles, but I quickly figured out that you CAN in fact kill everyone you meet and still beat the game, at least theoretically. You don't really get exp for killing things, so if you kill all the quest givers you won't get more than 1 or 2 levels, so I kinda switched to just being a dick and by the end I wasn't even doing that anymore lol

[Zebhra]

I am always picking the stuff i think is right or what NPCs deserve...an npc tryed to robe you and then got attacked by the dragon? help him and fight the drageon? or escape while dragon eats him? i wouldv picked "kill em both".

You found some evidences on the local boss, are you gonna submit them or blackmail the boss into doing what you need? Most likely i am going to use them and then backstab the boss anyway.

 

Are those examples good or bad choices? Becase i played the whole Witcher like that

[Nashetania]

I used to be the "evil guy" when I was smaller. But now I'm the "good guy"

[kingdomcome]

Always good, I've never had the balls to play bad.

[Kaguya]

I tend to pick the "evil" ones, since fucking others to make things easier to me is how I go about things IRL and it helps with game immersion. I see protags doing all that selfless stuff and just go "why the hell would you do that?", for the most part. Can identify much better with the "evil" ones.

 

Plus, it's just more interesting. 

[atorq]

I often go into a game with the notion of being the most evil bastard there ever was, but I never fulfill my objective, being evil is hard.

[TexasDice]

(Neutral) I'm a mercenary at heart, so my morality usually goes wherever my own gains lie. I'm ready to bend ethics a little, if that means I can make more cash. But I wouldn't do totally unspeakable things, there's a line somewhere.

Playing with my philosophy actually hinders me in a lot of games. I remember Mass Effect being really annoying, because I couldn't choose the red or blue dialogue options in most cases.

[CeruleanGamer]

Evil routes are always better whenever they are available. The bad guys always have interesting personality and are much more memorable than protagonists if they can pull off a great stunt, well more like mischief.

I am tired of being in the good side especially in JRPGs because all they do is fucking preach friendship, love, unity, and all that fucking nonsense. /rant

[Zenophilious]

I am always picking the stuff i think is right or what NPCs deserve...an npc tryed to robe you and then got attacked by the dragon? help him and fight the drageon? or escape while dragon eats him? i wouldv picked "kill em both".

Man, I hate it when people robe me.  If I wanted to wear a robe, I would've left the house wearing one.

I pretty much always do the good guy playthrough first, then do whatever the hell I want on the second.  Usually I play a more shades of gray character the second time around, generally being nice but stealing and doing morally questionable things to get the best loot.

[Valmore]

For some odd reason, I have the hardest time playing evil. Even though I know it's a game and doesn't reflect my worldview at all and it's silly, I have the hardest time doing it. Deus Ex? I prodded and tranqued and batoned all the enemies. Planescape: Torment? I did all good deeds and was nice. DnD? I play paladins. I had to read about

Rin getting raped by shadows because I couldn't bring myself to kill alter-Saber the first time.

Edited October 29, 2015 by Zenophilious
Spoilers >.<

[Zenophilious]

Spoilers!  >.<  Please cover them with a spoiler.

[Monmon]

Always on good side especially Mass effect,dragon age and Fable games.

except the reporter choice, i always punch her no matter what.

For vn i prefer anti-hero protag because it seems cooler and not boring.

[sub-zer0]

 I go with the good choices,since being evil just gives you a quick boost of cash or item or whatever, while playing nice makes you feel good since technically you made a morally correct choice , sure it might be easier if you play the pillage and burn everything way,but there are usually hidden rewards for being good, like the people you saved come thank you later with an item or gold, while being evil is acquiring the item or gold instantly, but good choices don't always guarantee a reward, while evil nets you something for sure,otherwise it wouldn't be evil.I'm a nice guy, so I tend to avoid killing people unless they completely ticked me off,and its rather hard to tick me off,unless they straight out attack me ,I'm quite forgiving. Also a side note about witcher 2, it was really hard to make the choices....since both endings are ....you know....

if you picked the to help the sorcerers, the elfs and dwarfs won't have a nice world where they can live happily, and if you choose to help Saskia, there is this witch hunt that kils thousands of people....both endings are bad...

Cool name by the way, but I think it should be CobraInvictus, but that's just my opinion 

Edited October 30, 2015 by sub-zer0
do I need a reason to edit this?

[Clephas]

Ok, first I have to explain that morality generally isn't my first, second, or even third concern when I make choices in a game.  Above all, I make a choice that is pragmatic and any benevolent or malevolent choices I make are based on that standard.  Generally speaking, this means that whether my character is 'good' or 'evil' is entirely dependent on the designer's intent... and his moral prudishness.

You can tell when a developer has the moral sense of a child who has learned Christian values by rote when even a basic decision to defend a settlement full of people against a bunch of raiders instead of going out and rescuing the single kid they kidnapped is an 'evil' choice.  On the other hand, you can tell when a developer has a more developed sense of morality when that same choice either leaves you morally-neutral or good.  Why?  Because in a wider sense of moral responsibility, going out to save the child is the more immoral choice, as doing otherwise would cost more lives - possibly the lives of other children. 

So basically, that developer's own moral compass determines whether my character is good or evil, since I am simply playing in a rational, pragmatic, and (when possible) morally responsible manner in most cases.  As pure good and pure evil have more or less been abandoned by a lot of big western rpg developers, the kind of moral 'coloring' you see in the example above is more obvious than it was in the days when KOTOR was the foremost 'morality system' game.

Edited October 30, 2015 by Clephas

[BookwormOtaku]

I basically play a good guy, especially since it alot of times the evil choice seems more stupid than evil though if it makes sense I might opt to do something underhanded like shoot the explosive barrel a bad guy's standing near as he gives a speech about how he's going to kill me (ME2 for example), or depending on the background of my character I could have him/her say or do something dark if something in the story really pushes him/her to it.

Edited October 30, 2015 by BookwormOtaku

[Zebhra]

I am always picking the stuff i think is right or what NPCs deserve...an npc tryed to robe you and then got attacked by the dragon? help him and fight the drageon? or escape while dragon eats him? i wouldv picked "kill em both".

Man, I hate it when people robe me.  If I wanted to wear a robe, I would've left the house wearing one.

.

Knock it off

[TK8305]

For games I'm always doing the good & wise thing.  I kill only when I'm forced to, treat characters well, etc.

[LiquidShu]

When presented with these choices I don't tend to stick to either side, I may lean towards "good" a tad more though. 

My choices are made depending on the situation and emotions at the time. 

... I do tend to execute though.

[Tawm]

I don't really care. I usually play through games with choices multiple times to experience all the different outcomes and content. I don't project myself onto characters.

[monkeysrumble]

Usually play a more neutral side leaning more towards good then bad most of the time. Not a saint but not a complete psychopath either. The only time I play evil is usually through a second play through intentionally doing it, I'll never play evil on my own accord. With allot of RPG's I enjoy making characters in my head with a moral compass then basing my decisions of that moral compass, which can lead to some interesting results.