>Those people that go "REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE I WANT TO BE NEUTRAL! WHY DOESN'T THIS GAME ALLOW ME TO BE NEUTRAL!!?!?!? REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE" in an RPG
Is there anything more pathetic?
And to all you neutralfags, please post some compelling choices (or non-choices) a neutral character could make.
>>343197237
>please post some compelling choices (or non-choices) a neutral character could make.
In any given situation, you shrug, turn 360 degrees, and walk away.
Reminder that being a fence sitter doesn't make you cool, it just means you like the feeling of something being in your ass.
>>343197237
He could elect to not make shit threads like this. A compelling choice indeed
self preservation is neutral
>>343197521
So do neutralfags want "being alive" simulators?
>>343197459
t. cuck
Most games with a morality system, Infamous for example, tend to give rewards for maxing out in one direction or another. This means that once you make a decision to go one route, all other decisions you make in the game are based on that one thing. So, do you steal the food at the beginning? No, ok, now your decision whether or not to try and save your girlfriend later is already made for you.
A neutral route allows you to pick and choose what decisions you want to make at any point, so the character you play might well save some babies from a burning building at one point, but later on wont hesitate to kill an antogonist when they get the chance. This allows the character and the story more room to develop in interesting ways, rather than ALL GOOD or ALL EVIL.
>>343197237
i dont give a fuck about neutral
i just wish the choice was more varied than "eats puppies with babytears for breakfast" and "come on to me and tho shall find salvation"
First, you would have to define neutral. Even someone like Geralt is basically a good guy.
>>343198026
I made good and evil decisions in my playthrough of inFamous 1 so I don't know what you mean senpai
>>343197804
>doesn't like objective: survive missions
casual
>>343198209
>First, you would have to define neutral.
Too bad neutralfags can never, ever, EEEEEEEEEVER - do this.
>>343197237
nothing :^)
>>343198308
You're the one going on about neutralfags. Maybe you'll want to explain yourself.
>>343198380
Consider me the real life Zapp Brannigan, because I just hate neutralfags and fence sitters.
When faced with dilemma irl do you actively consider whether you're the good/bad guy?
No that's fucking retarded. Why should the writing in games be designed around morality of a child?
>>343197459
kek
>>343198223
not him and I played only infamous second son.
In that one being good or evil doesn't really matter, except for a cutscene at the end of the game, but you need to fill the morality meter to unlock specific abilties, so a neutral playstyle is basically hard mode.
>>343198563
So, are you gonna drown yourself or burn yourself up to a crisp?
>I don't want to do either of those things
Pfeh, how's that fence-sitting treating you?
>>343198719
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_dilemma
>>343198623
>When faced with dilemma irl do you actively consider whether you're the good/bad guy?
A video game isn't real life
>>343198308
Basically, in a game, I want to judge each choice separately. I don't want to follow a path. It could even be being both bad and good in the same mission. Like, doing something bad, but then subtly warning someone that they're in danger.
>>343197237
Its the point of view. The what if i wasnt there at all but was watching from afar. Its just a consequence of a situation that you had no hand in.
>>343197237
I always play neutral characters in video games because the goodie two shoes or edgy babykiller archetypes get old fast. If your game has a shitty binary morality system it's probably not worth playing which is definitely true for all modern Bioware games.
>>343198764
Ironically, false dilemmas are the problem with moral choice systems.
>>343198093
This
Even worse when you are canonically some kind of hero, in that case "evil" actions should be something like "the end justifiy the means", but what you get is some pyscho-level stuff, like punching babies and killing grandmothers.
>>343198764
>A false dilemma (also called (...) black-and-white thinking)
The own article you linked shows that "neutrality" (as in, sensible thinking) is good.
>Would you rather risk your life with a 1/10 chance of living to save a cat or burn that cat alive?
Welcome to Infamous games.
>>343198942
The problem is "neutral choices" make for bad game design
Even in the much beloved New Vegas, you're still sometimes trapped in a good/bad dichotomy because it's just far more interesting
>>343198764
Wow, didn't know Wikipedia had TWO articles about Infamous.
>>343198308
>Too bad neutralfags can never, ever, EEEEEEEEEVER - do this.
Maybe because neutrality within good and evil is fucking impossible?
Neutrality requires there to be nuance between two sides. Good and evil has no nuance, it's literally black and white. Meanwhile neutrality in the Witcher makes perfect sense since there is no objectively good or bad choice.
Frankly it's sort of embarrassing how Mass Effect waters everything down to either Paragon or Renegade. For cartoonish games like Fable it's fine but the whole point of Mass Effect is to create a believable world.
...a believable world with objectively good and evil choices.
>>343197914
no u
>western RPG moral choice
>hello im a poor woman do you want to help me find my cat?
>Yes leads to you saving her cat, rescuing an orphanage full of disabled children and all your female party members sucking your cock dry out of admiration
>No leads to you taking a ballpeen hammer to the back of her head and stealing all her money
Gee moral choices sure are deep an intricate
morality systems are garbage because they boil down morality to "good" or "bad".
the best alternative is a more vague approach, that doesn't reward you with arbitrary "good" or "bad" points. Fallout New Vegas did it best, the choices you made shaped the narrative or had logical consequences/rewards.
>>343199091
When people talk about neutrality, they talk about neutrality overall, not for every single choice individually. What this means is that every decision has a different context associated to it. Good RPG's or games with RPG elements have consequences about your choices that affect your overall reputation but are also way more specific (You saved this kid, his wealthy family shows up later to help you out during warfare, you killed him, they're your adversaries)
Bad games have some sort of alignment system where every choice is objectively Good or Bad and you get better gameplay and story benefits by always going with the consistent choice (so, for example, you get sick ass powers because you're always killing everyone at all times like a total psycho. Why would you act like this? You need them evil points, that's why)
Hope this helps.
>>343197237
> hates neutrality
> praises black and white moral choices
The latter is far worse than the former. I thought we were distancing ourvels from moral choices like this. Witcher is a good example of a game without many black or white moral choices.
>>343197237
>please post some compelling choices (or non-choices) a neutral character could make.
Genociding every other factions
>>343199091
>The problem is "neutral choices" make for bad game design
No they fucking don't. You only think they're bad because you only have experience with examples of neutral choices done poorly, which isn't a surprise because most modern devs are horrible writers who can't be assed to do a little extra work in making meaningful character development.
Apart from developer dick riders, the only other people I ever see defend binary good/evil gameplay are SJWs (which makes sense considering so many come from Bioware). They have such a immature, limited view of the world that they only see the world as "good or evil", lacking the self awareness that their definition of "good" is usually anything but. I like a good old fashioned classic clash of superhero vs supervillian from time to time, but if you think neutral can't be done well you have a very childish view on the world.
>>343199917
>the only other people I ever see defend binary good/evil gameplay are SJWs (which makes sense considering so many come from Bioware). They have such a immature, limited view of the world that they only see the world as "good or evil", lacking the self awareness that their definition of "good" is usually anything but.
Huh. Interesting.
>>343197237
In reality, there is no such thing as absolute good or bad. Everything is nuanced or down to consensus. There is no objectivity when it comes to perception, perception is always subjective.
If we were only given absolute choices in a game, it does not allow for any real nuance.
The same way a Neutral choice should also never always be True Neutral.
But we should have a Neutral, or really just alternative choices that are less good or bad when it fits the situation, for the sake of nuance and roleplaying.
Just use console to give max para and renegade. System is broken anyway.
>>343197237
>forcing people to pick one of the two bland sides the game have
>not just having a neutral option that embodies the "fuck them I'll be the king by y own means"
>>343197237
I love mass effect, even 3 but the binary morality system is shitty.
They also couldn't decide if renegade was being a bad guy or not.
Like kicking a bad guy out a window or not letting a mercenary leader monologue before attacking is a renegade action why?
>>343198026
AT LEAST with Infamous it has the superhero vs villain dynamic. You're supposed to be a comic book character.
It's the same with Star Wars where light side and dark side was already an established thing.
>>343197237
Oh boy THIS thread again.
Look these games are shit for a reason, a good example of good choices is the Witcher series
>I fell for the bait
It's less "I want to be neutral" and more "I want actual character development and not HURR AM BAD/GUD"
Basically everyone wants NV's sysytem without the pointless karma
>>343200823
>>a good example of good choices is the Witcher series
>Be the absolute good guy
>Or still be the good guy cause you have to beat the game but kind of be a dick about it I guess
Wow truly The Witcher is brilliant
Define neutrality in videogames and give examples without using the Witcher.
>>343197237
Nice pasta, But the idea is to have some nuance instead of just having the option to kiss the baby or kill the baby,
>>343201206
people have gotten around the binary morality system, even Telltale games are better than that now.
>>343201468
>even Telltale games are better than that now.
t. Telltale fancuck
>>343201468
That's fine anon, but there isn't really any examples because most games don't know how to write about shit.
>>343197237
Choosing between a racist A or racist B. Choice: Shoot both.
>>343200976
>Missing the point this fucking badly.
You might be retarded.
Witcher isn't about being good or evil, Geralt IS a good guy, or rather, he tries to be.
That is literally the whole point of the books and the games. Trying to make the right choice when there is none, Geralt tries to be the better man but it often bites him in the ass because the Witcher world is cruel and unjust.
>>343201608
it's true though
>>343201610
quality of writing is a different subject, OP was talking about non-binary choices
not going to lie it sort of pissed me off in mass effect 2 that I had to choose to be one to pass speech checks
that game sucks so bad compared to the first. not even going to bother with the 3rd
>>343201468
>people have gotten around the binary morality system
Outside of The Witcher they have not.
>Telltale games
Railroaded and only a very small handful of choices actually have an impact on anything.
You still haven't given an example of neutrality in videogames.
>You need to invest points on either Paragon or Renegade
>Just investing and leveling naturally isn't enough, you also need to increase an arbitrary score of how paragon/renegade you are for the later part of the game
>>343201704
>Edgelord neutralfag comes up with an edgelord scenario to make himself even edgier
Neutralfags, ladies and gentlemen
>>343201839
Did you even read the OP?
>>343201886
yea it fucked me over because I was choosing both depending on the situation and it fucked me over in late game.
>>343202045
Yes and nobody in these threads has even defined what neutrality in videogames would be.
These threads are literally only good for shitposting
>>343199860
Not doom guy is best guy!
>>343198942
>Play through the ME series
>Be a hard ass with a heart of gold that gets easily annoyed by stupid people
>Which means everybody that isn't a handful of your companions and a few side characters.
>Havefunwith 'sacrificing' the council
>Agree w/ illusive man until his allignment becomes chaotic retarded>Can't spare Tali's name because I'm not Jesus incarnate
>Spent years lurking about 3's ending so I'm prepared>Can't persuade IM to kill himself
It had it's ups and downs. Still think it's better than going Jesus one game then Satan the other.
>>343200738
>They also couldn't decide if renegade was being a bad guy or not.
Renegade was never "being a bad guy." ME renegade/paragon is a choice between action hero and boy scout.
>>343199860
>killing your friends
>not creating a kingdom ruled by a just, loving God
>not bringing humans back to the natural order alongside demons>allowing SMTIV to happen
>>343202464
>Can't spare Tali
did you saved veetor and kal'reegar? you could've rallied the crowd.
I had an Alliance character that was a Horde diplomat, and peaceful event organizer.
But, the true motive behind it was just to sleep with Blood Elf women, and the occasional orc/undead depending on looks/decay levels.
And, I also had a Blood Elf male that was an Alliance diplomat, and peaceful event organizer and his primary motive was to sleep with Night Elves, Draeneis, and Humans.
>>343202704
lawfag's idea of natural order is entropy
>if everyone is dead everything will be in perfect balance
>>343197237
>please post some compelling choices (or non-choices) a neutral character could make.
The idea that choices could be grouped as either 'paragon' or 'renegade' or by whatever arbitrary moral system you come up with is foolish in the first place.
In a good RPG you only have functional choices relative to the problem at hand. Some of them may have dire consequences to others, some of them may be altruistic, some of them may have no lasting consequences at all.
Mass Effect is a shitty RPG.
>>343199362
>JRPG moral choice
>no choice at all
>your character will always be a faggot no matter what you actually want to do
>>343198563
pointless gif. the meaning could be conveyed just as well with a still image
>>343202868
Dammit. Well I'm not dredging up that series again just so that I can makebest girllive happily with friendly Geth neighbors.
>>343199917
To add to what this anon is saying, I think a lot of the blame can be placed on narcissism among game developers.They want to shove their opinions and the things they did down your throat like a toddler wanting to show their mommy what they did, but being the shitheaded one that throws a fit if they don't get what they want. That's why you get unskippable cutscenes, credits, logos, and railroaded choices in games. Because they're so completely full of themselves and only ever listen to fanboy's praising them (why would you ever do that, I love certain settings and franchises but I don't have any qualms about ripping them a new one for shitty work). Its a sad age of excessive safe space horseshit where people can't handle criticism.
>>343203275
This.
Developing an RPG is actually an effort of humility, since you need to give away the main character into the player's hands. You're not writing a story, you're providing a storytelling environment for the player to explore on his own.
>>343197237
>Paragon or Renegade
>Every Paragon choice is the right choice in ME3
>Renegade choices are wrong and most of the time ignored and replaced with a Paragon Lite result
>>343203629
>Every Paragon choice is the right choice in ME3
But Destroy ending is the renegade choice.
>>343203956
>Not saving your robot niggas at Rannoch
>Not disregarding TIM's rant and controlling the cuttlefish death machines
>>343197375
>"You want to save the world?"
>no
>"You want to destroy the world?"
>no
>"So want do you want to do?"
>walk away
>The End. Game Over
>>343197237
Want to go neutral? Then don't play infamous, instead play elder scrolls or fallout
Choosing sides usually leads to linear gameplay. When a game lets you choose whether you want to join a faction or not and has gameplay to accommodate whatever choice you make, it makes the game that much more compelling.I'm talking in general, of course, not specifically about any Mass Effect
>>343197237
Neutral as in moral or neutral as in factions? If all factions are cunts or horribly retarded then neutrality would be a great option.
>>343203126
The faggot bit is still debatable, but games like SMT and some of its spin-offs have alignment choices as a major mechanic.
>>343197237
But the game DOES allow you to be neutral, in the sense that splitting your choices roughly evenly between Paragon and Renegade is not only more engaging than just picking a color and sticking with it, but you also get access to MORE conversation options than you would if you focused on one or the other.
