How is your moral compass when playing computer games? (unboxed spoilers)

Eh, as in all things, it depends on the situation/game. Usually, I’m content to live and let live, unless someone’s decided to actively work or fight against me. Then, y’know, it’s a case of “screw it—they knew the risks and they made their choices.” Show no prisoners (er…make that “take no mercy.” Wait…).

Sometimes, I try to minimize causualties, or make them quick. If for no other reason than to save on ammo. Other times, well…some days, I’m just in bad enough a mood that I need to blow off some steam against a simulated opponent. To the point where I end up just pounding wet pieces of bone into the floorboards.

I do almost always avoid hurting police officers or animals (especially domestic ones), though. What can I say…my Dad’s a cop, and I have a soft spot for dogs. As Poe said, “There are chords in the hearts of the most reckless which cannot be touched without emotion. Even with the utterly lost, to whom life and death are equally jests, there are matters of which no jest can be made.”

On the other hand, I’ve had my…creatively darker moments.

I was playing Civ II once, many moons back. I was Rome, and one of my computer opponents was France. One of my oldest enemies, they were…I finally fought a war of conquest against them in the mid A.D. centuries (IIRC), overruning all of the cities in the main French homeland of central to north-east Europe. But that didn’t destroy them…they had a city or cities, somewhere, beyond my reach. But I didn’t know where—and we’d occasionally skirmish as my forces moved across Eurasia, over the centuries.

Finally, I did find them—it was during a war with China, to which France had allied, in what had to have been the 19th century or later. The entire French nation had relocated—probably starting from around a small, isolated colony that had escaped my initial conquest, and had gradually prospered—to Siberia, almost to the Pacific. They gave me a devil of a time during my campaign in China, and wouldn’t give up even after I came to terms with the Chinese leader. The anger and bitterness towards me hadn’t waned, over the centuries, it seemed. I had no choice but to muster my forces—including an army still battered after the conquests in western China—and finish a final, brutal war against the old foe. Finally, I triumphed, with all of the Siberian French cities in my control. France, as an empire, was no more.

But my cold wrath would not be satisfied. Normally, conquered cities would be rebuilt, refortified, and absorbed into the Empire proper. Especially ones near a foe I had yet to completely conquer. But they had cost me too much, hindered me too long, caused too much trouble.

I sold off every city improvement I could from the former French territory, and had my troops begin systematically destroying the tile improvements from around them—including, as the plan progressed, the railroads, at least from the outlaying cities. Food intake to the cities, predictably, began to falter. Increasing starvation, and population loss. The conquered cities were set to work building new units…the “settler” units, each one of which costs the builder city a population point, presumably of volunteers or conscripts into the new labor/city founder unit.

As each settler was completed, the city would get a little smaller…and I’d have a new labor battalion. Perfect for use as combat engineers, or some of my public works projects like terraforming the Sahara desert into lush farmland, or building new roads in South America. Or maybe, eventually, being used to found new proper Roman colonies, or simply absorbed into other cities to boost production.

All the time while the old Neo French Homeland wasted away, slowly reclaimed by desert and forests, dwindling cities sitting like silent, empty-eyed ghosts as the world passed them by. Eventually leaving only a spiderweb of unused roads in a dusty, forgotten corner of the world.

Ethnic Cleansing, courtesy of Sid Meyer. To quote Caligula…“For the Senate, and the People…of ROME!” :eek::smiley:

Ranchoth: your story brought a tear my eye…

Where’s my copy of Civ II, anyways? Fucking French…

I tend to play as a goody-two-shoes. Even in RTS games, unless I’m playing as something like the GLA or Undead I generally aim for zero casualties.

I think Fable especially annoyed me in this way-- the evil options were just assholey rather than self-interested, and often the ‘good’ options were way against my personal mores or didn’t make sense (as a kid to narc on the guy chatting up the other girl rather than minding my own damn business; to help the execution go through, to leave the bandit king to live in disgrace and ignominy rather than killing him in heroic battle, etc).

The thing that annoyed me about Fable was that even if you were trying to play an evil character, you were still constantly having to fight bandits, and every time you killed one you got “good” points. So the gameplay itself was skewed towards players running good characters. You’d have to off a couple of random traders after running into bandits, for no reason other than to negate the “good” points by racking up some more “bad” points.

I remember once playing Fields of Glory and during the battle of Wavre I sent into the meat grinder wave after wave of proud French soldiers to a hill overlooking the Prussian flank that turned out to not to have the field of fire I thought. After the battle was over there were scattered almost a generation of young French all over the hill who died needlessly. I felt kinda bad.

That’s not right. You get more Eve from killing the little sisters, flat out and no mistake. You also get it faster and easier. You do some other goodies that the doc sends you if you save the sisters, but that’s it.

I tend to play games about 90% good, deviating only when there is a really great reward for villainy. Or if the smarmy dialogue option is particularly funny. However, I tend to take the “evil” path when my options are limited to either letting an evil person go, or killing them. I think it’s pretty BS that letting a person go who has murdered others in the past and will most likely do it again is the good option.

In tabletop RPG’s, completely different story. My characters tend to be extremely loyal psychopaths (what can I say, being evil opens up new and interesting methods of problem solving, but I’m not big on intra party conflict.

I generally play the first time as “good” and the second time as “evil”.

Not really, here’s the spreadsheet. :wink:

I addition to that, you get several Tonics, Plasmids and Ammunition, so from a power-oriented view its not really a relevant choice.

I’ve played two characters over level 20 in Oblivion. With the first, a thief, I try to keep my fame and infamy equal and with the second my fame is 55 and my infamy is 0. So, I would say I’m never outright evil, but sometimes I’m neutral. I have an idea in my head though that the good mage with zero infamy is slowly going mad from going into the planes of Oblivion so much and that after I finish the main quest, I am going to go crazy evil.

When I played paper-and-pencil D&D, I usually chose Lawful Neutral or Chaotic Neutral as my alignment.

I’ve never even played the NOD campaigns in the various C&C games. I think I started the campaign in C&C3 but didn’t get very far and gave it up. I did play through all of Kane’s Wrath but you don’t have a choice as to who you play in that one and Kane is very charismatic. I haven’t played as the Soviets in any of the Red Alert games either. I do enjoy being the Chinese in Generals/Zero Hour skirmishes because they have some of the best firepower. They’re not really bad guys though.

In GTA I will sometimes go on a cop-killing spree but usually only if they cause me to fail a difficult mission. However, I have found that if you’re on a mission and a single cop comes running after you it’s much better to waste the bastard and outrun the 2-star wanted level rather than get pistol-whipped and have to start over from scratch. This is especially true in San Andreas during gang wars as the wanted level goes away once the gang war is over.

As a way of making up for my evildoing ways in Vice City, I will often level up as high as I can on Vigilante missions. It’s easy to get up to about level 20 before ammo starts to become an issue. The cop car doesn’t usually last that long though, even if you get the Cheetah that can be repainted.

I generally don’t play games with Karma meters, so it’s hard to tell, but in general GTA-styled games unnerve me so I don’t play those at all–but at the same time in RPGs my favorite strategy is to grind to absurd levels and then proceed to gleefully massacre the opposition (which in the RTS version fo Ogre Tactics this would have surely resulted in an Evil alignment).

blink

That’s exactly what I just said! :rolleyes:

I’m generally a paladin in my first run-through of the game, with one probably quite common exception: I will take anything that’s not nailed down. I figure that since I’m saving the town/country/world/wasteland, that entitles me to “commandeer” certain items for the greater good. I mean how many times have we seen Bruce Willis in some random action flick whipping out his badge and pushing some poor sap out of his car/motorbike?

So yes, I will help you retrieve the Amulet of Giant Wankery from the cave troll, and I will do it for no reward, but you better lock your doors good cuz Bruce Willis comin to get it!

I’m a friggin’ saint on my first playthrough of Fallout 3. My Karma’s never dropped below “Goody-two-shoes”

Once I’m done, I’m killin’ EVERYBODY!

Yeah, but, but, but…

…but, you get … stuff you would not get when you are havesting them, and the difference is only ~10% anyway. So you technically miss out a certain amount of Eve, but thats really not enough to make any impact in the game. (oh, and i sort of misread you post. :smack:)

What I initially meant was - it’s not actually harder to be good and not-selfish in Bioshock. The “hypnotize big daddy” - Plasmid actually makes it a little easier, I guess. It would have been nice to be able to be selfish and get more, or nice, and get less, not this watered down version.

My moral compass in games has been calibrated by Ultima IV and nethack. I don’t like games where I need to behave badly to get ahead. I avoid them. In nethack, I am a gnomish healer. In Spore, I am a herbivore. In real life, I may be an omnivore, but I dislike that in Spore that would mean I have to eat creatures as intelligent as I am.

I tend to play sim games. I try to be a good sim master. In the Sims 2, I keep my sims very happy, I avoid killing them generally. I do indulge in some behavior that I would find morally repugnant in real life: I name my sims names I would never give a child in real life. Radi 0, with daughter Elemen O. Runcible and Slice Quince who have children Spoon, Owl, Pussycat, Bong, Honey, Pea, and Spork (an alien child).

Me, too. Without even trying to be extra good, I am currently listed as “very good” even though I’ve stolen from people and done things that definitely would bring bad karma. I want to see how the game responds when you are a total asshole and just go apeshit on the wastelands.

For the purposes of this discussion, we should exclude games where you simply don’t have a choice. If Mission 6 requires me to blow the brains out of some innocent shopkeeper, I’m getting my gun and blowing that shopkeeper’s brains out. I mean, you play something called “Mafia” or “Grand Theft Auto”, what the hell do you expect? (I understand that you get a little leeway with GTA4, but Niko’s still a dirty rotten crook and doesn’t care who knows.)

Anyway, the overwhelming majority of the time, I’m with Just Some Guy. What are the consequences? There’s just no way to make an informed decision without knowing exactly where the good or evil path is going to lead. In most of the games where I had a choice, this simply led to two different endings. In that case, no sweat: do both, get the noncanon/boring/confusing ending first. All other times, find out what the reward or penalty is. In the original Pirates!, for example, you’re perfectly free to be against all flags and plunder ships indiscriminately. This results in every nation being hostile to you, making it just about impossible to unload plundered cargo, and also prevents you from ever getting any title (or a wife, for that matter). I doubt anyone tried it more than once before deciding that the proper course of action was to pick a side in a war and stick with it.

Some situations are just plain weird. In Dynasty Warriors 5 Empires, the only two moral standings worth anything are 1. Kleptomanaical, despotic, oppressive blackheart tyrant, and 2. Straight-down-the-middle Joe Neutral. The former if you really need the financial and military help, the latter if you’d rather not slog through a horde of angry peasants every battle. There is no sane reason whatsoever to pursue a path of goodness unless you’re specifically going for the “good Emperor” ending (which takes freakin’ forever).