What games has done the morality/karma mechanic better than the rest? Which side do you do on the first playthrough or just prefer the most in general, and why? Also how can we improve this mechanic to have stronger consequences other than slight NPC dialogue changes? Personally I think inFamous 1/2 did fairly decent with the morality system integrated with the gameplay, where if you were evil you'll literally suck the lifeforce out of anyone and your attacks are much more wreckless and chaotic and if you were good, your powers reflected on you trying to retain order and control such as zapping down enemies onto the floor.
Also if you're interested in helping with research featuring this topic, here's a short survey you can help fill out IF you want : https://lordb.typeform.com/to/NK9VkL
>>337183403
>1 billion Muslims worldwide
>500 million christians
Highest level of Virtuosity is represented by jesus
>Not Muhammad
ISHYGDDT
I think that Infamous could have done better with balancing the karma, as in having a neutral playthrough, but it did well with what it did, so I'm fine with it
>>337183804
The reason InFamous didn't have neutral playthroughs is because it was supposed to be based on comic book morality. No greys only black and whites.
>>337183403
For me, the first thing I do is look at what the rewards are. If being evil gets me the best weapon then I kill do all the evilest shit I need to.
If it doesn't matter, then I just do what I feel like. Generally speaking though, doing evil shit is generally easier than doing good shit. Usually you just need to kill someone or steal something, which is what you're doing 90% of the time anyway.
I do evil first to determine how bad the writers are at making an evil protagonist. Fallout 3 was pretty bad with how evil characters work. while nv was good about it. 4... didn't even let me be evil so.
>>337186838
What do you define as a good evil PC? I mean I know Fallout 3 was pretty bad with making your character evil, but just curious on a general level.
>>337188426
Theres multiple I consider "well written"
General progression: The character starts out "gray" Over time they get less and less connected to their good side and start to lose more and more morals.
Forced into it: Pretty easy to explain, protagonist thinks evil is his only choice
For power: Protagonist starts out good, but as more and more temptations get to him, he sacrifices his morality for power, it needs to be either progressive or a really high amount of power.
Start of darkness: Character does his first evil act with justification, as more and more acts are done he can justify them less and less
Take one for the team: The good options in the game make the game harder, a good example is infamous 1 where most good options made you take an extra hit or waste more time. You choose to be evil since you don't want to deal with that stuff.
Darker of two evils: Character picks evil because he doesn't like the other group he could have allied with.
>>337188426
I like evil PCs where people argue if he was even evil or if everything was justified.
>>337183403
I heard some good shit about Black and White's morality system. I think it was Black and White anyway.
I think that any game that makes being good harder than being evil does it well.
>>337190619
I heard good was actually easier. And being evil made the final boss make no sense.
>>337190619
I played Black and White 2 and it's not that hard to go in either direction. I think it is probably easier to go good than evil since evil required you to buy specific shit (like sprinkling heads on spikes or torture chambers everywhere) and do specific things (like sacrifice people every now and again) while being good just needed you to carry on and progress normally.
