Comments from Far Cry 3 producer Dan Hays suggest the game will feature some tough moral dilemmas – and that creating immersion is going to be the way Ubisoft ensures that these resonate.
Far Cry 2 Was (Despite Its Flaws) A Great So This Should Be 6 x More Awesome
Unlikely. Every game that claims to have moral choices ends up with black or white options that have no real impact on the story. Every time it's a choice to be an angel or a demon and nowhere in between.
what moral choice was there in Heavy Rain? Killing or sparing the drug dealer? It didn't affect the story no matter what you did. BELOW: What moral choice was there in Fallout 3? Blowing up Megaton? All that did was make you "very evil" and blocked off a couple quests. The biggest quest in Megaton could still be done. And again that choice was be the devil(detonating the bomb) or be an angel (saving the town).
That's a fair point. I don't think many games have legitimate moral choices. Bioshock would have been a lot better if they'd just ditched the whole kill/save the little sister thing. It was such a throwaway moral dynamic. I'd say mass effect 2 has some of the best 'moral' choices. They really squeeze their way into that grey area. I still wonder about my decision to brain wash all those geth for legion's loyalty mission. In the end I only settled on brain washing because I figured those extra troops would be useful in the upcoming mass effect 3. Kinda made me feel like a bastard which I guess is how you're supposed to feel when you're making tough decisions as a leader.
Some games do alright with the choices such as in the Witcher. But all in all, it's not easy to create moral choices because you've got someone who will come along like "what if I don't agree with the morals", and they can't accept that the morals have already be decided by the in game community. To have real moral choice, you need to account for more than action. You need three things to get to a meaningful world reaction from a choice... (Intended Action + Real Action + Results = Judgeable Outcome) Think about real life, if you have good intentions when you make a choice that ultimately hurts someone, you still have to face consequences. But those consequences may be lighter if your intentions were not bad. The difference between "involuntary manslaughter" and "murder". Video games have a hard time taking into account intentions, so the formula is only (Real Actions + Results = Judgeable Outcome) unless it's explicitly written into a more complex story.
It better not be those sort of GTA IV dilemmas where it's "kill guy A and be friends with guy B or kill guy B and be friends with guy A." That is not a moral dilemma, you're still going to kill someone to get something from the other one.
It could also be felt which choice was more rightful than the other, "morally" and in term of gameplay. For example, between killing Playboy and Dwayne, if you kill the latter, you'll only receive cash from Pboy and you'll never see him again, while if you take out Playboy, you'll hang out with Dwayne and he'll give you the apartment you can't get by other ways. So they were not real "choices". The only one that could make you doubt was Francis and his brother. You'll want to kill F over D but then, you wouldn't be able to phone him to have the cops off your back.
GTA definitely isn't the shining example of having choices. But how is the decision to kill Playboy X or Dwayne not really a "choice"? You seem to imply that because one option seems more rewarding than the other, there is no choice? Even when you're playing for the first time without knowing the outcome? That is the way some choices work though, the reward is not always balanced and the effect is not always deep. Sometimes the most rewarding choice might not align with your own values. If you really wanted a quick cash reward and believe that Playboy X deserved his lifestyle then the choice is easy right? It was brilliant enough that if you didn't feel sympathy for Dwayne then you'd think that Playboy X is the obvious choice for a friend because he has resources you expect him to share with you. But instead, the player gained more by sparing the broken man and killing the wealthy huslter. It was an interesting choice in my opinion, it wasn't super deep but it did present a moral dilemma where Niko (a criminal) has to decide which other criminal to align himself with and which to betray.
More dilemmas... such as whether or not to cut of the crazy, tribal-cut goon's moptop?
I swear I have someone lurking me and clicking disagree on everything I post. Because no matter what I write... dumb, smart, good, bad, or whatnot, I always have at least one disagree. Be a man and present yourself.
Doubt it. The industry hasn't hit the time of moral dilemmas yet...Only Heavy Rain has done it anywhere near the levels I want to see it at. Coding a game with actual moral dilemmas would take tons of time, and well this is Shovelwaresoft talking. It'll probably just be an attempt at copying InFamous, good or evil. When a game comes along where every bullet counts, every person you kill has an impact on your moral and the story, and every action you make has some effect on the outcome of an event....then ill be impressed with "moral" framework in a game. You should be able to do a good thing with bad consequences, or a bad thing with a good outcome.
. As usual, the casuals are getting their way and it looks like far cry 3 might turn into a scripted cut scene heavy Uncharted junk heap...I hope I'm wrong. This has been Sony's contribution this gen to gaming. Games that spend more time with cut scenes then actual game play and it's like some fungus with no end in site. Devs love the cut scene/rte garbage so they don't have to work and sit around all day drawing pictures to tell their story instead of game play. Uncharted, GOW, Heavy rain, MGS4, KZ 3 and now even Gears has falling for this nonsense with a reported 90 minutes of game play ruining cut scenes. Well at least the gaming media will be happy since this is all they seem to want to talk about...wow, it`s like a movie...O_o` Far Cry 2 was a fantastic game that left it up to the player to decide how they wanted to attack objectives and if they wanted to attack any objectives at all. Day and weather cycles, weapons unlocks, variety of vehicles including boats. A great bus service for the whiners that didn't want to drive a car or boat to their destinations BUT nothing but whining from the `it`s boring, I don`t know what to do ` or `the enemies re-spawn and now it`s hard ``...casuals out there. If you want to WATCH game play, go to U-tube.
You have so much anger. How many times did Sony ass rape your mother? Sony ass raped my mother 5 times and every day I think of ways to get back at them. I like your approach, shit talking on a game site. It's a novel concept; not too many people try that one. Teach me your ways. Please.
Thank GOd! I tell you what really was a bloody moral dilema, driving from one town to another in Farcry 2 while trying not to kill yourself from boredom.
N4G is a community of gamers posting and discussing the latest game news. It’s part of NewsBoiler, a network of social news sites covering today’s pop culture.