|
They should remake Ultima IV and if that does well continue along the path. Just as a basic framework it could really be outstanding.
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2020 08:47
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 2, 2024 20:50 |
|
|
Ultima IV is one of the most mechanically interesting games of all time in that even if it was easy to exploit, it is the only game I've ever seen that didn't just have a morality system tacked-on as an afterthought but actually treated acting virtuously as the entire point of the game in and of itself both mechanically and in terms of plot. There are a lot of games that you play and then get a mostly meaningless "here's how good and/or bad you were" statistic as afterthought when you're done with it. There aren't a lot where "be good" is how you play the game in the first place.
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2020 12:10
|
|
|
BadAstronaut posted:Still don't understand why dungeon crawlers are called blobbers
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2020 12:21
|
|
|
Cardiovorax posted:Ultima IV is one of the most mechanically interesting games of all time in that even if it was easy to exploit, it is the only game I've ever seen that didn't just have a morality system tacked-on as an afterthought but actually treated acting virtuously as the entire point of the game in and of itself both mechanically and in terms of plot. I think a lot of morality in RPGs is less Good vs Bad and more Nice vs Unpleasant. Being Nice is easy. It's often superficial, quickly praised, and more often than not refuses to rock the boat beyond the one singular instance or encounter. You might be doing a nice thing for X or Y, but the societal ills that brought about their problems remains unchecked. It's a band-aid. Being Good is difficult. It's unrewarding, messy, and will likely make you far more many enemies than simply being nice would. It involves digging deep into the complexities of the sociopolitical status quo we might find ourselves in -- be that in the micro or macro. Which likely requires taking to task people who might be very comfortable with said status quo -- often revealing very *nice* (perhaps even beloved) people as not very *good* ones. And I'm not saying that every game needs to have a thoroughly profound and nuanced take on morality. Genuine efforts can and often do miss the mark because the people trying to convey a message are ill-equipped to discuss it, much less present it in a consumable format amidst a video game that -- in all likelihood -- will involve a great deal of violence. And most games will usually have a mix of both "nice" and "good" morality plays to one degree or another. So it's not surprising to me that many morality plays in video games would go for a more simpler, digestible take on morality, than invest the time and energy to create a meaningful critique or observation on what it truly means to be a good person. Sherry Bahm fucked around with this message at 12:59 on Dec 4, 2020 |
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2020 12:56
|
|
|
Well, I don't disagree with you there, although I think it's a bit myopic to say that 'real good' can only be defined in terms of sociopolitics. It implicitly excludes the discussion of subjects such as the type of virtue ethics that Ultima runs on. That said, overall, I tend to not want deep examinations of morality in my video games. Real evil is horrid. It's the kind of thing any sane person avoids being confronted with as much as possible, and for good reason. I mostly enjoy Ultima 4 because it does something more conceptually interesting with the idea of morality mechanics than to just have them for the same of having them, not because I think it's really particularly deep, thoughtful or complex.
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2020 13:14
|
|
|
Yeah, I don't think I worded things very well in that regard. I certainly don't mean to imply that small acts of good are irrelevant or not real somehow. And it's those simple acts of good being the central focus of Ultima IV that make it so unique and such a stand-out example of morality in RPGs. And again, I'm not suggesting one approach is better than the other. Some people go into video games for the power fantasy or to escape from the ugly complicated reality of life. And that's fine.
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2020 13:38
|
|
|
Oh, sure. I just thought I might have given the wrong impression there of what I meant in regards to Ultima. 
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2020 13:40
|
|
|
Cardiovorax posted:Oh, sure. I just thought I might have given the wrong impression there of what I meant in regards to Ultima. Oh no, I agree wholeheartedly with your point. I just went off on a 3 cup of coffee tangent. 
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2020 13:42
|
|
|
Tin Can Hit Man posted:Yeah, I don't think I worded things very well in that regard. I certainly don't mean to imply that small acts of good are irrelevant or not real somehow. And it's those simple acts of good being the central focus of Ultima IV that make it so unique and such a stand-out example of morality in RPGs. I wanted to say that I enjoyed that I enjoyed your take on the situation a great deal, both in terms of games themselves as well as the real world. I personally think that a lot of real life "goodness" is done either explicitly to curry favour with others/look good in the eyes of society or for the superficial high, often very self-righteous, that it brings - the whole "no such thing as unselfish human behaviours" argument. As I also think that a lot of society favours appearing good to actually being good, your post struck a chord with me.
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2020 17:23
|
|
|
JustJeff88 posted:I wanted to say that I enjoyed that I enjoyed your take on the situation a great deal, both in terms of games themselves as well as the real world. I personally think that a lot of real life "goodness" is done either explicitly to curry favour with others/look good in the eyes of society or for the superficial high, often very self-righteous, that it brings - the whole "no such thing as unselfish human behaviours" argument. As I also think that a lot of society favours appearing good to actually being good, your post struck a chord with me. Doing something good for people is always better than doing nothing and talking about moral fibre without the will to put it into action is worth less than hot air.
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2020 17:29
|
|
|
Cardiovorax posted:Not talking about you specifically with this, but the whole implicit "so there!" childishness of that reasoning always annoys me. "Yeah but you're doing nice things for other people because it feels good, so you're still an rear end in a top hat and not any better than me" is not a deep insight, it's just sour grapes. In my experience, it's projection more than sour grapes. If someone is saying everyone is selfish, good chance that person is selfish and rationalizing by believing everyone else is also selfish.
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2020 17:40
|
|
|
Honestly, it's not like it should matter anyway. One can be selfish and still be a good person doing good things for others. The important part is doing them, and being all concerned about "purity of intention" is for people who have their heads stuck too far up their own asses to ever get around to the "doing" part of it.
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2020 17:50
|
|
|
this discussion reminds me, a neat old-school rpg that's largely forgotten because it was for mac that deals with ethics and geopolitics is odyssey: the legend of nemesis.
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2020 17:52
|
|
|
Might and Magic Merge Mod update: Still hopping through worlds completing quests. I completed most promotions minus my Monk who I need to go to light or dark with, and the Cleric and Sorc who it looks like I can switch between light and dark, so the idea would be get Dark first for Grandmaster Dark Magic and turn the Sorc into a Lich. Then go Light so I can Grandmaster Light Magic. What's interesting is the Bolster mechanic, which will make enemies in areas harder. I need to figure out how it works exactly though. Plus I'm going to have to try some of these new potions.
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2020 17:53
|
|
|
CYBEReris posted:this discussion reminds me, a neat old-school rpg that's largely forgotten because it was for mac that deals with ethics and geopolitics is odyssey: the legend of nemesis.
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2020 17:56
|
|
|
IMHO the big difference that everyone tends to forget between Ultima and what came after is that Ultima isn't "be good or evil", it's "be good or get lost". None of that rewarding both sides crap, you either strive to be the virtuous man you're supposed to be, or you fail. It's the most moral of all morality systems.
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2020 17:56
|
|
|
Chev posted:IMHO the big difference that everyone tends to forget between Ultima and what came after is that Ultima isn't "be good or evil", it's "be good or get lost". None of that rewarding both sides crap, you either strive to be the virtuous man you're supposed to be, or you fail. It's the most moral of all morality systems. The Drakensang-games operate on a similar morality, as they are based on the German tabletop RPG The Dark Eye. And that one operates under the assumption that players only play heroes, not villains. The tabletop RPG even straight-up tells you in its rulebook that you're not supposed to play "evil" parties and quietly encourages you to just leave for another game if you want to do hogwash like being not good. Because of this, doing evil in Drakensang-games tends to be punished, not rewarded.
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2020 19:41
|
|
|
I did not expect to be using words like "boring" and "tedious" for a game set in the Dark Sun universe; however nostalgia goggles off, that's how I've been finding Dark Sun 1. The Dark Sun 1 walkthroughs and character build guides have been wildly more interesting than the actual game; so I'm just going to drop Dark Sun 1 and move onto Exile 1 & Anvil of Dawn. Since I was able to get through KotC1 which uses modified & 3.5 rules, thinking I might be able to understand character generation/gameplay in Temple of Elemental Evil with the mandatory CircleOf8 fan-patch.
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2020 20:06
|
|
|
BadAstronaut posted:Still don't understand why dungeon crawlers are called blobbers I love how Grimrock explained that, you move as a blob because you're a bunch of prisoners that cannot separate because they are literally chained together. But then again, I love many things in Grimrock. Those games rocked. Might replay 2 once I get off the ancient office laptop.
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2020 20:15
|
|
|
Pierzak posted:I love how Grimrock explained that, you move as a blob because you're a bunch of prisoners that cannot separate because they are literally chained together. I rebought Grimrock 2 on Steam (I already had the GOG version) because there was an EverQuest-themed mod for it on the Workshop. I used to play EQ back in its glory days, such as they were, and I couldn't resist. I didn't know about the "chained together" thing, but I don't really care either. So many games have parties that move in perfect lockstep that I don't even question it anymore. Yes, I have played a great deal of Eye of the Beholder - thanks for asking!
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2020 23:06
|
|
|
In games the 'good' choice is always the popular one. People love you for being on the good path. It'd be more interesting if a game actually made you piss everyone off by disrupting societal norms when you do 'good'
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2020 03:02
|
|
|
That approach has its own problems. The only way you could do that reliably would be by making a society so cartoonishly evil as a backdrop that no one could take it seriously, for one. If you don't, you run into the problem of "the good thing to do" being ambiguous enough that there's a good reason no can agree on it or you run into the problem of, say, setting in 16th century Japan and your 'good thing' coming across more as "ha! how do you like that, you backwater primitives  " cultural imperialism than anything.e: what is fun when a game forces you to do the opposite of that, being made to live in the head of a completely different kind of worldview if you want to succeed. King of Dragon Pass is the go-to masterpiece example of that. You lead a tribe of magical bronze age vikings and have to make the tribe prosper through a wide range of events and decisions. You can be a bad viking or a good viking, that's up to you, but if you want to succeed in the game at all, you have to a viking on the terms of your people - and that's not necessarily what a modern person would find intuitive. For example, arranged marriages are both commonplace and widely agreed to be a good thing, because they make sure the tribe forms good connections and stays strong. Your job as chieftain is not to prevent that, it's to make sure that you get the best deal possible. So when a girl is unhappy with her choice of suitor, you can either call the wedding off... or you can hold a grand festival of challenges, where young men from all over the pass will compete for the hands of a pretty young girl. If the old suitor wins, then the girl might suddenly be a lot happier with the arrangement, knowing that she got one of the toughest, smartest and most poetic (that is an important trait, definite competition material) badasses around, so all is good in the world. Cardiovorax fucked around with this message at 14:43 on Dec 5, 2020 |
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2020 14:32
|
|
|
FuzzySlippers posted:It'd be more interesting if a game actually made you piss everyone off by disrupting societal norms when you do 'good' But speaking of morality, how many games actually feature negative reactions to helping people of the "we didn't ask for that/gently caress you and your meddling" type from the people you helped?
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2020 14:44
|
|
|
CYBEReris posted:this discussion reminds me, a neat old-school rpg that's largely forgotten because it was for mac that deals with ethics and geopolitics is odyssey: the legend of nemesis. Cardiovorax posted:It's apparently freeware now, if anyone has an interest in finding an emulator to try and play it with: https://www.paranoidproductions.com/odyssey/ This is really neat, thanks for bringing it up. Not sure how to get started playing it, but it's really cool to read about games like this.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2020 15:14
|
|
|
Started playing Exile 1 & Anvil of Dawn. Went with the PreFab party in Exile 1, wandering around without a goal or mission so far. Anvil of Dawn: uh the Court Magician teaching you basic magic was hard to take seriously, given the animation of the character and position of their bulbous "Wizards Staff"...do like the streamlined-ness of combat, and the automap feature, not wild about the literal placement of keyboard commands in AoD.
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2020 08:57
|
|
|
Tin Can Hit Man posted:I think a lot of morality in RPGs is less Good vs Bad and more Nice vs Unpleasant. From the point of view of something like baldurs gate, it was always, do you want it to be really hard (evil) or do you want the town guards to be chill (good). Roleplaying evil is like your morality is napoleon or dracula (or various monsters in between. You're bad because you're doing antag stuff. I agree completely that an actual nuanced take on morality or ethics is just not very comfy. It's even easier when its a pantheon of gods and following one god is just "evil" and following another is "good", because that's the evil god, and that's the good god.
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2020 13:10
|
|
|
yeah i kind of understand why the more cartoonish take on player-inflicted evil is more common because the more realistic sort of emotional blackmail, gaslighting, etc. in games like planescape torment feels incredibly gross and unpleasant to actually play even though I appreciate on some level the option is there, acknowledging how awful people typically get away with being so awful.
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2020 13:43
|
|
|
Oh you're a bhaal spawn? That's evil. Paladin to the healing god, you're good!
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2020 14:30
|
|
|
Loving the morality chat on the last ~30 posts.
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2020 06:49
|
|
|
Hope your game is making good progress, Bad Astronaut.
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2020 14:59
|
|
|
Snail Information posted:It's even easier when its a pantheon of gods and following one god is just "evil" and following another is "good", because that's the evil god, and that's the good god. The implications of objective morality are frightening ideas that rarely get explored in games, but it would probably be difficult to represent meaningfully via game mechanics, you're basically trying to take an alternate angle at tackling the problem of evil. The Prince of Nothing books explored a similar idea but in an ultimately quite childish and surface-level manner.
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2020 16:42
|
|
|
I like the exploration of atheism in game worlds where deities objectively exist and make themselves known. I used to think the very idea was dumb, and then 2020 happened, so now I absolutely believe there would still be atheists in a world of direct divine intervention
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2020 16:46
|
|
|
As Granny Weatherwax would say, there's a difference between acknowledging that gods exist and believing that they're deserving of worship.
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2020 16:51
|
|
|
Dr. Quarex posted:I like the exploration of atheism in game worlds where deities objectively exist and make themselves known. I used to think the very idea was dumb, and then 2020 happened, so now I absolutely believe there would still be atheists in a world of direct divine intervention Cardiovorax posted:As Granny Weatherwax would say, there's a difference between acknowledging that gods exist and believing that they're deserving of worship. I agree. I'm essentially an agnostic Jew. To summarise my take on the matter, if I found out that there were a god I would not worship him. Either he doesn't exist, he cannot do anything , or he chooses to do nothing. In any of the three cases, why would I be reverant? I realise that I basically just quoted Epicurus, by the way, but that's my summary.
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2020 19:43
|
|
|
When comes to game settings, I can certainly understand why D&D ultimately had to solve that problem by introducing the concept of the "Wall of the Faithless," because even at their best, Faerun's gods are largely a clique of self-aggrandizing manchildren and petty tyrants who hardly if ever make anything better for anyone. They're more liable to be the problem in any given situation than they are to be a solution to it. That's a real problem for any game setting that wants to portray its gods as genuine and active providers of moral guidance. If they do too much, then there isn't much trouble left for the player characters to solve. If they do too little, the whole moral angle tends to go right out of the window.
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2020 20:04
|
|
|
Cardiovorax posted:When comes to game settings, I can certainly understand why D&D ultimately had to solve that problem by introducing the concept of the "Wall of the Faithless," because even at their best, Faerun's gods are largely a clique of self-aggrandizing manchildren and petty tyrants who hardly if ever make anything better for anyone. They're more liable to be the problem in any given situation than they are to be a solution to it. D&D (and a lot of other RPGs) really take their inspiration for the gods from ancient myth, particularly Greek, where the gods are worshipped mostly out of fear rather than devotion. You might ask something from them occasionally but it's much more of a "please don't smite me" thing.
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2020 20:06
|
|
|
The Cheshire Cat posted:D&D (and a lot of other RPGs) really take their inspiration for the gods from ancient myth, particularly Greek, where the gods are worshipped mostly out of fear rather than devotion. You might ask something from them occasionally but it's much more of a "please don't smite me" thing.
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2020 20:29
|
|
|
The Cheshire Cat posted:D&D (and a lot of other RPGs) really take their inspiration for the gods from ancient myth, particularly Greek, where the gods are worshipped mostly out of fear rather than devotion. You might ask something from them occasionally but it's much more of a "please don't smite me" thing. This may be true, but I think that the paradigm in a setting like FR is considerably different. In that settings, and there are many like it, the pantheon of gods reflects the various aspects of humanity, both good and bad, and people worship gods that share their values and priorities. A lot of people who worship Torm genuinely want to help people and the people who worship Bane are genuinely horrid tyrants who want to oppress people, so they turn to a god with similar goals to help them gain power. There are plenty of agnostics and plenty of hypocrites, of course, but having gods that reflect all aspects of metahumanity leads to conflict and that makes the game. You are correct that in the case of a monotheistic objectively good deity the need for heroic action isn't really necessary, but when there are just as many good deities as bastard ones it's another storey. I do disagree that in such settings deity worship is out of fear, though. Sure some people toss a coin to Umberlee so that she doesn't sink their ship, but plenty of people mean well, want something specific or just crave power. I will agree that most of Faerun's gods are shitheads, though, which is probably why they downplay them in 5e.
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2020 20:32
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2020 20:33
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 2, 2024 20:50 |
|
|
Baldur's Gate 1's writing is very functional for the most part but the end has some good bits, like "If Sarevok has the arrogance of a god and can organize death on a mass scale like a god, who's to say he isn't a god?"
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2020 20:37
|
|
