Events which test the player morally

[Samson]

Morally? Oh please, I hack, slash, burn, pillage, and generally be an asshole in games - morals are nothing. If there were decisions in the game which were based purely on morals, then everybody would choose the "evil" approach - if gave punishments for choosing the "evil" approach, than it's an infamy system, not "events which test the player morally".

While you may want to generally be a dick in games, not everyone does. Even if it's an instance that give you a slight pause on your decision, then I'd say it's done something right. It doesn't even need to track "Paragon/Renegade" like other games, just give you the choice. As soon as you put it on a scale, people will want to be on one end or the other.

With the example above, what if you target the mining vessle first? Is that more of an "evil" option than killing the pirate first? Morality is never black and white. It's all shades of grey and they change based on how you look at them.

[Bedshaped]

With the example above, what if you target the mining vessle first? Is that more of an "evil" option than killing the pirate first? Morality is never black and white. It's all shades of grey and they change based on how you look at them.

Initially I was thinking that maybe the pirates would then split the loot with you and you'd part ways.

Then the next encounter with a pirate might be "We heard you helped our brethren so we won't be destroying your ship... for now." and you basically avoid a potentially dangerous skirmish.

So doing good and bad things don't just increase some arbitrary status bar, but actually effect the journey you take.

[irongamer]

With the example above, what if you target the mining vessle first? Is that more of an "evil" option than killing the pirate first? Morality is never black and white. It's all shades of grey and they change based on how you look at them.

Initially I was thinking that maybe the pirates would then split the loot with you and you'd part ways.

Then the next encounter with a pirate might be "We heard you helped our brethren so we won't be destroying your ship... for now." and you basically avoid a potentially dangerous skirmish.

So doing good and bad things don't just increase some arbitrary status bar, but actually effect the journey you take.

This. Starfarers of Catan has similar encounters where you can choose to aid pirates. It may pay off and it may not. With a game like FLT there could be longer running effects as Bedshaped mentioned.

[constablebrew]

So far there is only one example. I have a hard time envisioning other scenarios where the moral decisions come into play other than some sort of standard set of choices: Ignore, Barter, Beg (for free supplies), and Attack (choice of potential targets in the system).

Only larger factions and allied factions would care much about how you treated an associate of theirs. Small pirate organizations are unlikely to communicate between each other. So it could be reasonable to have a friendliness rating for different factions, adjusted accordingly for your actions with those faction members and their allies. But this system would not be very useful unless you know ahead of time how big each faction is, who their allies are, what parts of space they control, and whether or not you'll need to pass through those areas.

Maybe space can be colored slightly according to who "controls" the area, meaning the odds are you'll encounter someone form the controlling faction.

[Mczosn]

I'd like to see factions and reputation gains if possible in game. People who know u will be more likely to help ya or conversely attack you!

[CanadianWolvie]

I don't think this suggestion is a good one and here is why:

Faster Than Light.

Follow with me here, in order for something to have a reputation, enough information that another party can ascertain the actions and likely motivations for those actions needs to reach them, communication - are we in any reasonable way to suspect there is technology that is faster than the FTL drive that could communicate that pertinent information and give the parties involved time to process it and reach a conclusion that would affect reputation?

The arrival of the player's ship and crew is the advent of communication - heck, in some situations, your ship since it is trying to flee the hordes of ships spreading across known space and that it knows if it catches up to it, they are boned, FTL has to be your best resource for delaying information of your where-abouts reaching your enemies.

If anything, you would be spreading the reputation of your enemies before you, your own reputation is behind you and you are not going back towards the damn enemy fleet are you?

So instead, I would see a reverse reputation in place, the moral choice would be to warn the enemies of your enemies of the impending doom coming up behind you. Or maybe it could be a job to do some "pony express" work and deliver some "mail" as you flee since you are the fastest form of communication since you are faster than light. Then another choice on your part would be to open the mail or not - or maybe you missed its destination and that place is already lost the enemy fleet, so what does it matter but what if that file has a treasure map? Or a virus? Or maybe its just love letter, sent by a desperate sailor realizing your arrival meant he would no longer see his loved ones...

Think about it, please. Your ship is The Reputation, the Herald of The Fleet. "Run or form a fleet of your own and fight! But we already tried that, so I highly suggest running like us!" Your crew might say. "Join us, flee your slow ass mining vessel, attach its resources to ours and live! You will at least stand a chance with us, we have FTL!"

[Cirno]

In a smaller implementation of a moral system. Have moral choices, but don't necessarily keep track of the ethics of a captain.

If I keep repeatedly raping and pillaging across the galaxy, I will hopefully feel bad about it. Or maybe at some point my ship will be so damaged that I can't afford to take the 'nice' option, and will instead have to do something that conflicts with my personal ethics.

That kind of situation will impact me personally, even if repercussions aren't coded into the game proper.

Without punishment, people will always choose the 'evil' option, because it's usually the path of least resistance, and the one that offers the most obvious and immediate reward. You know that there will probably be no reward for helping the stranded ship besides personal gratification, but the benefit of turning it into scrap is obvious.

Unless you have to face consequences for your actions, moral choice events will basically boil down to

1. Lose valuable resources (Good option)
2. Gain valuable resources (Evil option)

[Pettingson]

Without punishment, people will always choose the 'evil' option, because it's usually the path of least resistance, and the one that offers the most obvious and immediate reward. You know that there will probably be no reward for helping the stranded ship besides personal gratification, but the benefit of turning it into scrap is obvious.

Unless you have to face consequences for your actions, moral choice events will basically boil down to

1. Lose valuable resources (Good option)
2. Gain valuable resources (Evil option)

There is no absolute about always taking the "evil" choice. I for one always do the "good" option even if i don't get that pile of cash instead i give it back to the original owners.(Think Overlord)

You can't judge other people over how you and your friends and their friends friends ect, do it.

I like being the good guy, even if that gives me less cash, loot, dialog, w/e. Cuz thats how i am


That said, i'd love for a moral choice thing. For me it doesn't have to have such a profound ripple effect of how the rest of the game is played or gone through. But surprises are always fun, and I trust Justin and Matthew will do their best, if they implement it, to make it not so Absolute but grayish. Which i also like just like Justin. Makes for, in some cases, thougher choices

[praguepride]

I think there should be moral decisions only if the outcomes are random.

Most games fail at this because the choices are "be a comic book hero/ be a comic book villain." Nothing that really goes along the route of "hell is paved with good intentions."


So an example might be: You come across a dangerous looking but damaged ship. A distress call is being broadcasted out. Do you:

A) Approach to rescue
B) Power up shields and weapons and wait

If A then it randomly picks between you actually rescuing the crew and getting a reward...or being ambushed. If B) then either the trap is sprung but you're in better shape or you can loot the ship (because survivors died).


This would be the example of how the "good" choice isn't the "best" choice.

For the "path to hell..."

You are hailed by a foreign ship looking for help with repairs
A) Help them even though you're not familiar with their technology
B) Ignore them

If A) then the results mean that you either save them or mess things up even worse and end up killing the crew. Your reward? Loot the ship

[Mczosn]

I really don't see moral choices as that important for this game. It is a rogue like after all. A lil rep would allow u to pit in to certain places and not others, maybe get support while flying thru certain sectors. I don't want to go out my way to save some race mind you, I'm just worried about my ship and crew. I don't want a bad mass effect system implemented in any other games.