01-10-2005, 02:05 AM | #11 |
40th Level Warrior
Join Date: March 24, 2002
Posts: 10,215
|
A good game should have multiple possibilities. The game also should allow freedom of choice. ie the player can choose to be good, neutral or evil. This makes the games worth replaying again and again. A game that is based on one possibility is dull, boring and linear and after finished playing it people might not be bothered to play the game again for 2nd round. Would you like to play a game where 1 + 1 is always equal to 2 ?
A real life morality question should not arise in a gaming world. Real life and Gaming world ( fantasy ) is not the same. In real life it is perhaps wrong or unethical to kill someone who just help you. But in gaming world like in W&W, players should not feel guilty about killing Anephas or Kerah ( They have help you in the game ) towards the end of the game. It is up for the player to decide to do what they want. |
01-10-2005, 06:39 AM | #12 |
Red Dragon
Join Date: April 3, 2001
Location: Prague, Czech Republic
Posts: 1,586
|
Bungleau - I can sign each of your words. Complete agreement.
I also consider the M&M way a good possibility but it's not "bullet proof". For example, step aside and cast Armageddon. Nothing will happen to you, no reputation consequences, no closed doors and so on. IMO, the best solution is not giving the player a possibility do do such things at all. You cannot attack an innocent villager because you haven't the attack option at him. Clicking the villager will initiate a dialog. Another inplementation consists in making innocent bystanders "transparent". Your effort with your sword results in "hitting air" and is ignored completely. No consequences of the effort but also no result. Naturally, the same happens to your spellcasting and ranged weapons. Jsalsb - Good parenting is almost useless in our world. Our behaviour is determined by our environment and not by our parents. And the ruling principles in our environment are - violence, aggresion, and "care for Number One". But it does not mean that an ideal RPG should support these principles. An evil path does support them: You are playing an evil hero and not an evil bastard. Your evil deeds are appreciated and not condemned. That's what I consider wrong. Kakero - I cannot agree. The player who lives the real life and plays the game is the same person. He is accepting (or unaccepting) the same ethic criteria. If he wants to state that he has some character then he cannot help in the real life and kill in the game under the same circumstances. A game, which does not allow you to behave unethically need not be dull and boring. Being good does not mean being a crystalically pure palladin fighting for Justice, Order, and Law from begining to end of the game. Being good means not doing things that should not be done at all, under no circumstances. For example, murdering without reason, deceiving friends or innocent people, or destroying objects only to vent frustration. It's not a serious restriction. [ 01-10-2005, 06:43 AM: Message edited by: Radek ]
__________________
My name is Demon\'s Last Day. Yes, the last one. |
01-10-2005, 09:35 AM | #13 | ||
40th Level Warrior
Join Date: March 24, 2002
Posts: 10,215
|
Radek - I strongly disagree your first statement. Have you ever play an mmog or an online game before? Have you ever heard of pking ( player kill ) before? Do you know that people do tend to behave differently in a game than in real life? Do you know that some people including me like to pk other players? Now if you say that people in game world will act the same as in real life. Does it mean that these players also like to murder or kill people in real life?
I think you are contradicting yourself in your second statement. In your second line and I quote Quote:
Quote:
edit : Geez, this is getting out of topic. [ 01-10-2005, 09:40 AM: Message edited by: Kakero ] |
||
01-10-2005, 10:56 AM | #14 |
Red Dragon
Join Date: April 3, 2001
Location: Prague, Czech Republic
Posts: 1,586
|
First of all, I didn't want to offence anybody. If you feel differently then I do appologize. Please, it's not a hollow phrase but my real wishing.
A game is a fairy tale for me, in which I am taking an active part. I am behaving according to my nature, even if it's only a game. As far as the "pking" games are concerned, it depends, what's the role of your friend in the game. If he represents himself, then I cannot play such game. If he is a leader of opposing forces, which needs to be defeated, then the situation is different. Let us consider chess for example. You are playing against your friend and your goal is to checkmate (that means, kill) his king. Is it unethical? No. But suppose that the game logic is such that your friend is representing himself and the goal is killing him. I cannot agree with such game any more. It seems to be only a formality but it is not. The goal of any game is to "kill" somebody, be it a computer of a friend. Some games have the goal to really kill somebody. I must object against such games. In the rest of games, "killing" means defeating forces led by somebody. Such games are okay at me. As to the palladin. None of us is a palladin. We are doing things, which we should not do day after day. But there should be a limit, where we should feel that we cannot cross it and remain humans. That's what I meant with "under no circumstances". Therefore, no, being a pure palladin isn't the only way of playing a "no evil" game.
__________________
My name is Demon\'s Last Day. Yes, the last one. |
01-10-2005, 11:00 AM | #15 |
40th Level Warrior
Join Date: October 29, 2001
Location: Western Wilds of Michigan
Posts: 11,752
|
I agree with you on agreeing with me, Radek [img]smile.gif[/img]
But I beg to differ on the other points. I agree with jsalsb that parenting does make a difference. A parent's job is not to make every decision for their child, and neither is it to give them a laundry list of reactions for every situation. There are just too many of them. Rather, they need to give them the tools to be able to make up their own minds, even starting at a young age. That's why parents need to be involved. Sadly, it doesn't happen enough these days. I believe that studies have shown that if you look at schools with student who do well overall, and contrast them with those where students do poorly, one of the big differences is how involved the parents are. The more involved the parent, the better the child does. And "involvement" means more than just sitting in a conference once every six months. We read a lot of books with our kids, and some of them do cover things that are a little more advanced than we'd like. We discuss those things, and get our kids to talk about what they'd do in given situations. It's the age-old argument of nature versus nurture, or heredity versus environment. Can the parents have an impact? You bet. I've seen it happen with my kids... to the good *AND* the bad. They've picked up some of my bad habits on occasion. As for Kakero's comments, I tend to agree. Gaming is an escape for me -- it lets me do things I can't in real life. I wasn't born with straight 24 stats, but I can pretend to be that way in W&W. I can't cast magic spells, but I can through my characters. Last night, I wanted to game badly because I'd had a rotten several days. Unfortunately, I couldn't because AdAware had clobbered my system and wouldn't let me run W&W. I wanted to kill something, but couldn't; so I went to bed. I didn't kill something in the real world to make up for it (although I did want to kill a white russian (drink, that is), but I didn't have any). Of course, you might make the argument that I'm well-enough adjusted to know the difference between reality and fantasy, even after seeing all those Road Runner cartoons when I grew up [img]tongue.gif[/img] I agree that the MM approach to morality still left some holes, but I think it was a step in the good direction. If you remember some of the NPC interactions, you may recall that the folks at NWC brought up some of those kinds of issues. Think of the things the children would talk about -- whether goblins were people too, basically, or whether they had thoughts or feelings. It was an effort to make you think, as you went along wielding sword, spear, and staff. I certainly would like to see games make things more realistic. Imagine if the townsfolks in MM started hiring heroes or "police" to combat you... imagine what that could have been like I think the key thing in games, just like in RL, is not to prevent evil from happening, but to give you the choice, and see what you do. And then live with the results and implications. And yes, I'd like to see a whole lot more of them.
__________________
*B* Save Early, Save Often Save Before, Save After Two-Star General, Spelling Soldiers -+-+-+ Give 'em a hug one more time. It might be the last. |
01-10-2005, 08:54 PM | #16 | |
Red Wizard of Thay
Join Date: January 7, 2001
Location: Honolulu, Hawai'i
Age: 40
Posts: 837
|
Quote:
Why don't they ever tell the cool rape and murder stories in Sunday School? |
|
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests) | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Mavin Sword | Laminak | Wizards & Warriors Forum | 1 | 12-11-2001 09:28 PM |
Is the Mavin sword necessary? | Jazzid | Wizards & Warriors Forum | 4 | 11-01-2001 05:01 PM |
Someone please help-Mavin Sword | RainOfThorns | Wizards & Warriors Forum | 4 | 09-19-2001 12:53 PM |
Mavin Sword | Avalon | Wizards & Warriors Forum | 2 | 01-18-2001 07:58 AM |
Mavin Sword | Mammawlin | Wizards & Warriors Archives | 2 | 11-09-2000 09:01 AM |