Rpg's and Choices

[Normal_Guy]

I've seen a trend in the recent rpgs and some in the old ones as well, why do they always push you to do good in these games. When you choose to be evil they either punish you really hard to the point it's stupid or they outright take way the evil choice. Or I'm just retarded and these trends don't exist.

 

[Lackadaisy]

You chose to be evil by using an apostrophe to pluralize, you monster.

 

[Clop]

Haven't noticed, but if such RPGs exist, I wish to get a list of these so I know to never ever touch them.

 

[Magnus did Nothing Wrong]

I've noticed it as well. I think the main reason for it is that games are too expensive for their own good now. Since most people probably would go down the good path they just don't put in any evil options that could radically change the game as that's extra work that most people aren't going to see. Instead they add in a couple side quests with some bad choices and call it a day.

 

[Y2K Baby]

You play shit RPG's is the reason.
www.rpgcodex.net

 

[Normal_Guy]

You play shit RPG's is the reason.
www.rpgcodex.net

Probably

 

[Spatula]

It makes sense in the way that, killing everyone is the easy way so the game makes it harder for you by making everyone hate you.
It also makes sense that if you put more effort into going non lethal rewards you because it is usually harder.

 

[Slartibartfast]

I suspect, from a writing standpoint, it's easier to try to push you to be the lesser evil, through punishments of villainy and enticements to good, than it is to simply let you run riot. Most RPGs rely heavily on the "big bad" conventions, and if they let you be a worse evil that requires a fuck-ton more work.

Also, if evil acts are treated punitively, they won't get rated as harshly I imagine, or have to deal with as much outrage from stupid parents. Like how in modern Hollywood, a movie will be given a harsher rating (generally R) if the hero smokes.

 

[Smaug's Smokey Hole]

I feel that the player(me) is often punished by being guilt tripped into the good choices when helping the downtrodden.
"Oh you got our only family heirloom, grandmas ring, back from the bandits, we can give you 100 gold and be super-broke and to survive we have to prostitute our children or something horrible like that."
"(god damn it) Keep the gold."
"We can at least give you 50 gold and skip the important medication for our crippled child who might die, but maybe it is a blessing to be relieved of our horrible existence."
"(god damn it) Keep the gold."
bling -gets 30% more exp for the quest, actually needed gold to get health potions-

It would be interesting to see an RPG with that Dickensian misery, but where many NPCs are just playing up their misery to cheat and scam the naive hero/player clad in +2 gold armor, running that scheme until even the most bleeding heart player(me, again) gets tired of it and goes "fuck you bastards, I'll take the gold, check the drawers for more, tip the cripple out of the wheelchair because I bet he can walk aaaaaand I'll take that cauldron just to spite you."

 

[Recoil]

I feel that the player(me) is often punished by being guilt tripped into the good choices when helping the downtrodden.
"Oh you got our only family heirloom, grandmas ring, back from the bandits, we can give you 100 gold and be super-broke and to survive we have to prostitute our children or something horrible like that."
"(god damn it) Keep the gold."
"We can at least give you 50 gold and skip the important medication for our crippled child who might die, but maybe it is a blessing to be relieved of our horrible existence."
"(god damn it) Keep the gold."
bling -gets 30% more exp for the quest, actually needed gold to get health potions-

It would be interesting to see an RPG with that Dickensian misery where many NPCs are just playing up their misery to cheat and scam the naive hero/player clad in +2 gold armor, running that scheme until even the most bleeding heart player(me, again) gets tired of it and goes "fuck you bastards, I'll take the gold, check the drawers for more, tip the cripple out of the wheelchair because I bet he can walk aaaaaand I'll take that cauldron just to spite you."

I want a 19th century steam-driven sweatshop tycoon game.
"Young Billy lost his fingers in one of your gear-wells. Without steady work he'll never feed his consumptive sister Lillian. Press F to fire him"

 

[byuu]

RPGs need more Kreias

 

[⋖ cørdion ⋗]

FFXV's newest and last DLC basically made the main villain out to be the victim, turning the whole thing on its head.

Years too late and part of a butchered DLC pack, but I guess it's sort of down that road. RPGs need a necessary evil path.

 

[PL 001]

If you haven't played it yet, give Planescape: Torment a try. That game doesn't straight jacket you into being a goody goody, or a filthy neutral. You can really make some monstrous and cruel choices that really will make you feel evil and heartless.

 

[LazloChalos]

It really bothers me in RPGs, or any game that gives you choices in the matter of good vs evil, that the AI immediately knows what you have done even if there are no witnesses about. Many games have you be punished with dangers, difficulties or end games if you thread down the evil path.

A city sim where your practices are frowned upon your citizens? Why not institute martial law, shoot protestors on sight, "erase" dissidents, empower your supporters with arms and perks? It has worked for many countries. The bad guy can and does win many times, some times they even turn out to improve whatever situation they involve themselves into. Guess it boils down to development time, not to mention the writers and publishers aiming to appeal to a wide audience or avoid controversy.

There is also the matter of the "fork in the road" choice that may pop-up later in the game, where no matter how horrible you have behaved you can automatically lock into the good ending.

To be fair they are a little bit less heavy handed in their preaching that other genres (Spec Ops: The Line, Far Cry 2)

 

[UE 558]

To be fair they are a little bit less heavy handed in their preaching that other genres (Spec Ops: The Line, Far Cry 2)

I kinda like how RDR2 and Deus Ex 3 handle morality, where either "moral path" still fits into the main character's personality, unlike many games with blank slate avatars like ME or FOs 3 and 4 where you can either be "gud boi" or "literally hitler", though they kinda imply in both RDRs that “gud boi Arthur/John” is most likely canon version, while bad boi is mainly summon you play as when you want better looting reward and if you just feel like being a general asshole who holds up stores and mugs people

 

[Wallace]

A city sim where your practices are frowned upon your citizens? Why not institute martial law, shoot protestors on sight, "erase" dissidents, empower your supporters with arms and perks? It has worked for many countries. The bad guy can and does win many times, some times they even turn out to improve whatever situation they involve themselves into. Guess it boils down to development time, not to mention the writers and publishers aiming to appeal to a wide audience or avoid controversy.

You could do something like this in Alpha Centauri, it just makes all of the other factions hate you. (Fuck off Miriam, you violent bible-thumper. You'd nerve staple your drones too if you thought you could get away with it.)