Games that do player morality right - Inspired by dog killing simulator

[737 MAX Stan Account]

E.Ψ.Ǝ: Divine Cybermancy

I can finally post this

 

[Get_your_kicks_with_30-06]

STALKER because slavs have no morality and do whatever they want in their drunken stupors, which STALKER perfectly showcases.

 

[Pumpkin Girl IRL]

I remember having to pick between stopping the Taiwanese president from being assassinated by convincing him to wear a bulletproof vest or stopping political riots that get a bunch of civilians you never see killed. The former was obviously the better option, and it was a silly and contrived dilemma. How the fuck does letting the CCP assassinate Taiwan's leader cause less violent political instability than saving him?

It's explained. You only have concrete evidence of one conspiracy - assassination or riots - and if you choose the latter he can justify putting heavy, concrete security in place whereas talks about being seen as a tyrant and won't do if you can't get him said proof. He gets shot, but the destabilising riots are quickly shut down and CCP discretely move in to influence his successor.

 

[TenMilesWide]

The way Dishonored's chaos system changed the levels as you went was pretty neat, more rats and plague zombies the more people you kill. I wish there were more sorta gradations of fucked though, it was a little bit too binary, especially with the ending. If there were like 5 different versions of the last level with endings to match, ranging from 0-kill ghost all the way to "spotted by and killed every single entity on the map, including civillians," that woulda been great.

 

[Wonderful Id]

I'm gonna throw another vote to the Way of the Samurai series, since there's no real visible meter dictating how you are doing and you can get bad endings from good actions (kill the big baddie too early...whoops, he was keeping someone worse at bay) or vice versa, and you always have the option to just leave town if shit gets too hairy.

 

[Guts Gets Some]

NOT the Infamous games. For being the basis of the title, they sure don't mean jack shit in the long run. Second Son is the worst case. You can literally play the entire game as evil as possible, but so long as you play the final mission as simply neutral, you'll get the 100% good ending.

Pretty lame.

 

[Hongourable Madisha]

This War Of Mine, in the normal mode and in the Stories mode, has you make a lot of choices, mostly around managing your resources - whether you'll steal from people who are desperate or kill good people for their stuff or let your characters die if their skills are no use to you. A lot of it's very clear-cut good vs bad, but some of the choices are better or more nuanced, things like the museum story: do you sacrifice historical artifacts and proof of war crimes that people in years past have died to protect, in order to save lives (by burning them as fuel to heat an orphanage) or to bribe a soldier to smuggle the rest of the collection out? The characters all have different opinions on what to do, and they each make a good case for it.

 

[Snekposter]

Gonna toss out Witcher here. Having read the books prior to doing Where the Cat and the Wolf Play in W3 and knowing how Geralt got named the Butcher of Blaviken, that was an easy choice to make. Had I not though... I'd have just straight up killed the man.

 

[Gravityqueen4life]

good? evil? just let me kill shit!

but seriously, i have to say star wars knights of the old republic 2. the game punishes you if you either go full on moralfag or full on edgelord. the game (or rather your teacher kreia) tries to teach you to form your own opinion while also using both sides for your own benefit.

 

[Smaug's Smokey Hole]

Sidestepping the framework morality there's stealth games like Thief, Splinter Cell and Deus Ex and the choice of killing vs incapacitating. From what I remember there's no significant penalty for killing people in those games unlike something like Dishonored, so your decision on how to play isn't completely driven by penalties and rewards and it becomes a personal choice more than it is an in-game one. I know that I can shoot all those people but I never do because I think I can play better than that and go at it in a non-lethal way if that is even necessary.

That's the kind of morality system I like, one where I'm not chasing rewards or dodging penalties.

 

[Pumpkin Girl IRL]

My favourite bit about a non lethal Human Revolution run was enemies freaking out even more than if you'd just killed them. At the end of the day you're still smashing solid, carbon steel fists into peoples' heads - comas, disabilities, permanent debilitating injuries, etc.

Jensen would fuck you up, and in doing so demonstrate that you weren't worth killing. The Missing Link's antagonist flips out because of this, as they have no idea what else he's capable of because they've never seen him push his limits.

 

[madethistocomment]

This War Of Mine, in the normal mode and in the Stories mode, has you make a lot of choices, mostly around managing your resources - whether you'll steal from people who are desperate or kill good people for their stuff or let your characters die if their skills are no use to you. A lot of it's very clear-cut good vs bad, but some of the choices are better or more nuanced, things like the museum story: do you sacrifice historical artifacts and proof of war crimes that people in years past have died to protect, in order to save lives (by burning them as fuel to heat an orphanage) or to bribe a soldier to smuggle the rest of the collection out? The characters all have different opinions on what to do, and they each make a good case for it.

The game is based off of the Siege of Sarajevo, and a lot of the events were apparently based off of survivor's accounts of what they came across during the siege and what they had to do to survive. The whole point of the game is that war is hell for everyone, and it's really good at making you weigh every single decision you make and struggle with the instinct to survive at all costs vs morality and whether what you're doing is the right thing in the long run or not. It's a brutal game, but a very good one. 10/10 would recommend.

 

[An Ghost]

Thief, Splinter Cell and Deus Ex

You dont kill in thief because your character is weak as shit and youre gonna die if you try. Later splinter cells gave scores for not killing but double agent tried the whole morality thing. Instead you get a kill button or knock out button when gabbing people. And oh mam og deus ex is so hard full stealth. What i do like in deus ex is jc reacts in dialog based on your actions and not on any convoluted conversation tree. Fuck shitty dialog trees

The best games that balance the stealth vs kill in terms of skill are the metal gear games but again its in service of some score not morality.

 

[Duncan Hills Coffee]

The best games that balance the stealth vs kill in terms of skill are the metal gear games but again its in service of some score not morality.

I'd say the one time it is used for morality in Metal Gear is the scene in MGS3 during the fight with the Sorrow. The Sorrow brings back the ghosts of everyone you ever killed throughout the game, and the game remembers how you killed them. It's a fascinating scene in that the emotional response comes from seeing how much of a body count you've accumulated throughout the game, and not so much the game trying to make you feel like an asshole.

 

[Jason Wynn]

Planescape Torment easily.

Most games have a very narrow view of alignment.

Good - oh dearie me! I do so love all living creatures and wish no one any harm!

Evil - MWUHAHAHAHAHA!!!!! Kill em all!!!

Neutral - I'm bipolar!

Torment goes much deeper in alignment, as that plays an integral role in the overall story. You will not be able to play a good aligned character without having to make some rough decisions and truly question your actual motives. You will not be able to play evil without actually feeling like a sociopath. It's a great game I love to sperg about.

 

[Lemmingwise]

This War Of Mine, in the normal mode and in the Stories mode, has you make a lot of choices, mostly around managing your resources - whether you'll steal from people who are desperate or kill good people for their stuff or let your characters die if their skills are no use to you. A lot of it's very clear-cut good vs bad, but some of the choices are better or more nuanced, things like the museum story: do you sacrifice historical artifacts and proof of war crimes that people in years past have died to protect, in order to save lives (by burning them as fuel to heat an orphanage) or to bribe a soldier to smuggle the rest of the collection out? The characters all have different opinions on what to do, and they each make a good case for it.

I once decided to immersively play this war of mine. I had a friend that liked to watch and comment but not play. We bought some scraps of food, like low quality tuna cans and we holed up for a weekend to play this game.

We had a difficult time surviving the winter. We decided to be as virtuous as we could, but also try to survive. We wouldn't steal from people except if they tried to kill us. We would try to not kill people (but yeah we killed the town rapist). We had a nice trade going making cigarretes and booze. We saved people, took in an extra person in the house, helped the neighborhood with medical supplies. Sometimes you get rewarded for good deeds, sometimes you just miss one of your chars for a day and he cones back wounded and tired.
The negative effects of not helping is mostly morale decrease (for the non-selfish characters), which might lead to suicide, but can be staved off with their vices (cigarettes,booze,etc)

Then nearing the end of the war, while we had headaches from poor nutrition and ventilation (I mean us playing), the fighting and bombing outside intensified. It was clear the war was almost over from the sketchy radio. On the last day there was a nervous knock on the door. We didn't want all the hardship to be for nothing. We decided to not open the barred door.

We never found out who came knocking. Was it soldiers? Raiders? Someone in need of help?

We survived but I never forgot that knock. It was some sophie's choice shit.

Planescape Torment easily.

Most games have a very narrow view of alignment.

Good - oh dearie me! I do so love all living creatures and wish no one any harm!

Evil - MWUHAHAHAHAHA!!!!! Kill em all!!!

Neutral - I'm bipolar!

Torment goes much deeper in alignment, as that plays an integral role in the overall story. You will not be able to play a good aligned character without having to make some rough decisions and truly question your actual motives. You will not be able to play evil without actually feeling like a sociopath. It's a great game I love to sperg about.

Torment is so much better.

Chaotic - I bark at people and try to engage skeletons into conversation

Neutral - I make vows and I bark

Law -I make vows all day to everyone I run into

 

[Ponderous Pillock]

I think Assasin Creed Odyssey had some interesting choices in some of the quests and had some cool dialogue options with Socrates. There is a quest where you have to decide on euthanasia. There were mostly no gameplay consequences, but rather emotional ones.

AC O also gets my vote. There's one quest in which you have a choice that effects the game about 20/25 hours later. I was stunned to see it carry that far.

 

[Watcher]

I like it when games give you reasons to care about other characters so you don't feel like murdering them, and take those reasons away for some reason or other.

Like in Dark Souls you meet a bunch of characters who all have 1 thing in common, they're all undead. And the game frequently tells you that when someone who is undead has no purpose, they go hollow and turn into a mindless monster. In the game you can actually do this to characters in subtle ways. Like buying all of the stock of a particular merchant can cause them to disappear and then reappear later as a hollow. Similarly 1 NPC you meet throughout the game can turn hollow entirely because he survives a fight you can rescue him from, which leads to him losing his purpose and turning hollow. It simultaniously gives you justification to murder characters while also trying to find ways to avoid doing it because you might like those characters and don't want to see them go hollow. Which ties into the themes of loss the game has.

 

[AnaV]

Knights of the Old Republic, it's kind of goofy but I think it works out alright.

 

[SolidZone 26]

If you want a game with realistic morality choices look no further than the original Fallout on PC. That game presents good and evil based on your own personal views. For example, In Junktown their are two men vying for power, Killian and Gizmo. Killian is the Mayor and believes greatly in Justice and the law, while Gizmo is a wealthy business man who mostly make money through gambling and prostitution. They both want each other dead and you the player decides which would die. You would think that Killian is the best option but it actually is Gizmo as Gizmo makes Junktown larger and wealthier. If this choice was in a modern game you would be harshly judged for choosing Gizmo over Killian even though more people benifit from Gizmo gaining power.