Evil - how far should PE go?

[KillerClowns]

On the suggestions of genocide, I can't help but wonder how a small adventuring party is supposed to pull something like that off. Participate in or callously ignore, perhaps, but I somehow don't see the PC's party doing it unilaterally. Just... logistics, y'know?

Edited August 1, 2013 by KillerClowns

[rjshae]

 

Once your evil character becomes reviled throughout the lands for committing acts of cruelty and villainy, I'd have no problem with the game balance being shifted heavily against you. It is totally realistic for abject evil to be hunted down and crushed by any self-respecting civilization. Those of noble bearing would be willing to spend significant sums of gold to have you sought after by highly skilled specialists against whom you would be completely outmatched. Thus, playing an evil character long enough to reach the end game should require a significant amount of guile.

 

By the same token, the game should not be full of npcs who engage in savage cruelty for its own amusement, because I would expect those characters to be hunted down rather quickly - as much by other 'evil-doers' as by 'do-gooders' or what authorities there are.

 

But again, from what quotes have been offered on the development, it sounds like this is fairly in hand.

 

Right, but one of the aspects of adventuring may be that you will interact with unpleasant characters with greater frequency, so they may seem more common. In actuality, it is because you are seeking them out.

[AGX-17]

Not going to throw another thread into that retarded "evil" debate.

1x chance for making the thread, 2x bonus for making that statement.

[Sacred_Path]

By the same token, the game should not be full of npcs who engage in savage cruelty for its own amusement, because I would expect those characters to be hunted down rather quickly - as much by other 'evil-doers' as by 'do-gooders' or what authorities there are.

They should well exist as outlaws, as they do/did IRL, but they should also exist in the established power spheres. Guards should abuse you, merchants should give you bad deals, etc. CRPG worlds tend to be much too easy on murder hobos.

[moridin84]

Once your evil character becomes reviled throughout the lands for committing acts of cruelty and villainy, I'd have no problem with the game balance being shifted heavily against you. It is totally realistic for abject evil to be hunted down and crushed by any self-respecting civilization. Those of noble bearing would be willing to spend significant sums of gold to have you sought after by highly skilled specialists against whom you would be completely outmatched. Thus, playing an evil character long enough to reach the end game should require a significant amount of guile.

 

I think that Wasteland 2 will support this. I don't think that Project Eternity will be open-ended enough to allow it. 

[Pshaw]

Plenty of great posts here already sum up my thoughts on  going too far in deplorible acts does nothing to add to the maturity of the game so I won't really elaborate on that. I will say that I would like evil to be somewhat faction oriented. If I'm off being a complete asshat in a town that another one has a long standing grudge against  I'd like to see my reputation lead to me being reviled in the former and respected in the latter. I really liked how individual towns in Fallout 2 had their own reputations and I'd like to see a system like that only taken a bit further so there was a bit of interaction between your reputations in towns rather than having them be on an island so to speak. This shouldn't be limited to evil of course.

[Aoyagi]

 I really liked how individual towns in Fallout 2 had their own reputations and I'd like to see a system like that only taken a bit further so there was a bit of interaction between your reputations in towns rather than having them be on an island so to speak. This shouldn't be limited to evil of course.

 

Totally agree. And Fallout 2 (not sure about 1) also had some references to your karma. Even though that's a very one-dimensional approach, it's a start and I'd like to see something like that in PE, except it would take into consideration more levels, such as unnecessary violence, trustworthiness, morals, lawfulness, etc...

 

I'm also waiting for a game that deals with thievery in some good way, not that it automatically lowers your karma or does nothing. Morrowind at least didn't allow you to sell stolen items back to its owner... No game has ever considered there could be delayed consequences (something like very simple simulation of a finished investigation).

 

I am astonishingly old-fashioned

 

Just hypocritical (no offense, everyone is in some way). But that discussion is too long to be had on something as slow as forums. *cough*IRC*cough*

[Calmar]

What's up with the rape and genocide??

How about banditry, oath-breaking, or raising a zombie? You don't need to be as extreme as a sex offender or mass murderer to be evil..? If the game ist to be about *choice* and *character development*, we don't necessarily need any such violence-porn.

 

Besides, genocide is totally modern era stuff and would break my immersion into a Renaissance world.

[tajerio]

What's up with the rape and genocide??

How about banditry, oath-breaking, or raising a zombie? You don't need to be as extreme as a sex offender or mass murderer to be evil..? If the game ist to be about *choice* and *character development*, we don't necessarily need any such violence-porn.

 

Besides, genocide is totally modern era stuff and would break my immersion into a Renaissance world.

 

Well, in a world with multiple sentient races, you'd think there'd be some supremacists calling for extermination out there.  But I suppose that's a step above genocide.  Charming, isn't it? 

 

In reality, I would expect to have to deal with virulent and violent speciesism in P:E's world, at least in some places.

[Durinax]

What's up with the rape and genocide??

How about banditry, oath-breaking, or raising a zombie? You don't need to be as extreme as a sex offender or mass murderer to be evil..? If the game ist to be about *choice* and *character development*, we don't necessarily need any such violence-porn.

 

Besides, genocide is totally modern era stuff and would break my immersion into a Renaissance world.

I am surprised you think Genocide is a modern concept. Afterall the Romans committed the most comprehensive extermination of another culture. Genocide is a concept as old as war itself.

[Calmar]

 

What's up with the rape and genocide??

How about banditry, oath-breaking, or raising a zombie? You don't need to be as extreme as a sex offender or mass murderer to be evil..? If the game ist to be about *choice* and *character development*, we don't necessarily need any such violence-porn.

 

Besides, genocide is totally modern era stuff and would break my immersion into a Renaissance world.

I am surprised you think Genocide is a modern concept. Afterall the Romans committed the most comprehensive extermination of another culture. Genocide is a concept as old as war itself.

 

 

If you are referring to the Celts, the Romans wanted to destroy them because they were rebellious, not because they were Celts. Alltogether the Romans were probably the most tolerant and culturally diverse conquerors the world has ever seen.

There is a fundamental difference between fighting another culture to imbibe them into your own, or just kiling a large number of enemies and attacking another group just for the sake of destroying them.

[exodiark]

Genocide? Rape? That's grand, but when done mindlessly, randomly, or without hatred, they're boring. No matter how sadistic or shocking they are.

Let me take an example of evil done right from real life.

This ordinary guy:


turned these:


into



Why?
 

The [boston] bombings were in retribution for the U.S. crimes in places like Iraq and Afghanistan [and] that the victims of the Boston bombing were collateral damage, in the same way innocent victims have been collateral damage in U.S. wars around the world.

Simple, it's hatred.

Hatred drove him to make Americans suffer, to force them to see what it's like to die and labeled as worthless collateral victims. What it's like to die while doing mundane activities and what it's like to die because of something that's totally not their fault.

To be fair, the kid has a point:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wech_Baghtu_wedding_party_airstrike
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deh_Bala_wedding_party_airstrike

3 souls vs 50++ souls? A strong point even, and that's why his hatred is even more compelling and feel more personal.
His hatred also raise many questions. If the US government is responsible for these civilian deaths, are Americans also responsible for that too? Considering that Americans themselves are also the ones who elected their government and pay taxes to support their actions, evil or not.

Now that's evil.
That kind of evil is personal and makes you contemplate long and hard on the reasons why.
Why did NPC do evil things to me? Why did Obsidian give these evil options for me to use?

While evil actions may come from good intentions, I do hope that PE gives evil choices with high-octane personal hatred: hatred of neighboring cultures, hatred of other races, hatred of law or lawlessness, revenge and vengeance, etc. You would be surprised how shocking a simple act of evil can be.

Obsidian of course, have a great track record of delivering evil choice. The evil ending of MOTB, for example, is simply brilliant and seething with personal hatred. After all you've been through, you actually deserved it.
 

HATE. LET ME TELL YOU HOW MUCH I'VE COME TO HATE YOU SINCE I BEGAN TO LIVE. THERE ARE 387.44 MILLION MILES OF PRINTED CIRCUITS IN WAFER THIN LAYERS THAT FILL MY COMPLEX. IF THE WORD HATE WAS ENGRAVED ON EACH NANOANGSTROM OF THOSE HUNDREDS OF MILLIONS OF MILES IT WOULD NOT EQUAL ONE ONE-BILLIONTH OF THE HATE I FEEL FOR HUMANS AT THIS MICRO-INSTANT. FOR YOU. HATE. HATE.

—AM*

 

 

Edited August 2, 2013 by exodiark

[mcmanusaur]

 

 

What's up with the rape and genocide??

How about banditry, oath-breaking, or raising a zombie? You don't need to be as extreme as a sex offender or mass murderer to be evil..? If the game ist to be about *choice* and *character development*, we don't necessarily need any such violence-porn.

 

Besides, genocide is totally modern era stuff and would break my immersion into a Renaissance world.

I am surprised you think Genocide is a modern concept. Afterall the Romans committed the most comprehensive extermination of another culture. Genocide is a concept as old as war itself.

 

If you are referring to the Celts, the Romans wanted to destroy them because they were rebellious, not because they were Celts. Alltogether the Romans were probably the most tolerant and culturally diverse conquerors the world has ever seen.

There is a fundamental difference between fighting another culture to imbibe them into your own, or just kiling a large number of enemies and attacking another group just for the sake of destroying them.

 

More specifically I believe he's referring to the Gauls, but it's generally a mistake to refer to "the Romans" being responsible for something, given how loose the Roman state was. In fact, the only reason for the genocide in Gaul was simply that- having already conquered most of Gaul and established his reputation as a capable general- Julius Caesar needed to acquire enough loot so that he could compete financially with his richer political rivals. As such, Rome's "central government", if you're feeling generous enough to call it that, did not authorize Caesar's genocidal actions in any way, and it was simply the result of one magistrate's personal ambitions; it didn't really have anything to do with the Gauls being particularly rebellious. However, it is true that the Romans believed in harsh punishments for such behavior; they had demolished two great cities- Carthage and Corinth- in the same year, prior to Caesar's campaigns (somewhat ironically he would later attempt to restore both of them by establishing colonies at their sites). Thus, rather than demonstrating any kind of coherent policy, the Roman way depended on single magistrates independently making case-by-case decisions about what suited their personal interests.

 

Wait... what were we talking about?

Edited August 2, 2013 by mcmanusaur

[centurionofprix]

I don't think there is a limit as to how far PE should go if the plot calls for it. If this means crawling the utmost depths of rapacious depravity, cool. But there's also not much point in extending, just for the sake of it, beyond what the story/characters/themes call for.

[Naurgalen]

I would love to see that you CAN go and play REAL evil in the game. But for that the game should give you both actions/options AND reasons. Killing people, children, raping or whatever is insane... not really evil. To be evil you must know what morals or ethics are in the first place, and you must choose to discard them for a reason: revenge, hate, power, lust, greed or whatever sin can work.

 

What would you do to someone that kidnaps your love interest in the party and tortures/rape her? Thats a moral question, and a powerful one that can change the way you roleplay your char. Even more simple and greedier things like how far would you go for some really good item are nice roleplay experiences for a player.

[Aoha]

I am astonishingly old-fashioned: slavery, slaughter and murder are fine. Rape and killing kids? You sick ****s need turning over.

 

I don't really care about ethical inconsistency, those are my lines in the sand.

 

 

1st.) Your thoughts are contradictory if you believe that rape is worse the murder.

 

2nd.) This is only a game, there is no rape, murder, child killing or any other thing happening here since it is only a fiction formed around bunch of pixels.

 

3rd.) Other forms of fiction explored these themes time and time again, with out any public outcry. Lets take movies as an example.

 

Villain kills cops wife and child, cop goes on revenge run for the rest of the movie.

 

So lets not be hypocrites when it comes to video games.

 

4th.) Maybe you shouldn't be following this game, since some of the people that are making it also worked on Fallout games which would  make them  "sick ****s need turning over" according to you.

 

 

 

P.S. Only reason why I and most people ask for this is not to satisfy some depraved murderous desires but simply I dont want to see ****ing immortal NPCs in video games. It completely breaks immersion in the game world.

 

Realistic world = Better game

Edited August 2, 2013 by Aoha

[Micamo]

1st.) Your thoughts are contradictory if you believe that rape is worse the murder.

I don't see how it's contradictory unless you're making the "there's nothing worse than death" argument, with which I respectfully disagree.

 

2nd.) This is only a game, there is no rape, murder, child killing or any other thing happening here since it is only a fiction formed around bunch of pixels.

It's not a murder, but it is a representation of a murder. Representations have emotional power, and it's just as valid to be upset by representations of horrible things as it is to be pleased by representations of positive things. "You shouldn't be upset because it's just a game" is like saying "You shouldn't giggle at these kittens because they're just a youtube video."

 

3rd.) Other forms of fiction explored these themes time and time again, with out any public outcry. Lets take movies as an example.

 

Villain kills cops wife and child, cop goes on revenge run for the rest of the movie.

 

So lets not be hypocrites when it comes to video games.

Maybe so, but there's such a thing as something coming off so obscene and gross that it takes you out of the experience no matter how much it fits thematically. Everyone's line is different, and these lines apply in games just as much as they do in film. In a topic where the subject is personal lines of obscenity, I don't think saying "I, personally, would not be able to enjoy the game if it has child-murdering in it" is invalid.

[Tsuga C]

The question is about how far game should go?

So long as we're able to go as far as we please in the opposite direction as a counter balance and the world isn't a uniformly dismal, wicked, and corrupt place, then I say let Obsidian do what they please to serve the needs of the plot and enrich the world. Let events and sapients plumb the depths and soar to the heights in a rich tapestry of dispositions, motivations, and actions that inspire many, many re-plays.

[Tale]

Wait... what were we talking about?

That appropriate "evil" is of the sort done for a cause. Whether that be harsh justice, the need to expand in order to provide for one's people, or to stop those who may interfere with a greater good.

 

And that evil for evil, LET'S RAPE AND PILLAGE, is the juvenile sort that need not be represented.

 

Maybe...

[Monte Carlo]

 

 

I am astonishingly old-fashioned

 

Just hypocritical (no offense, everyone is in some way). But that discussion is too long to be had on something as slow as forums. *cough*IRC*cough*

 

 

 

No, I'm not remotely hypocritical and yes, I do take offence. Please explain.

[Aoyagi]

No, I'm not remotely hypocritical and yes, I do take offence. Please explain.

 

 

Fine.... I guess one reply shouldn't start a flamewar.

 

If I was to put it shortest way possible, I don't see any difference (on moral/evil scale) between rape and torture. And I certainly don't see any difference in manslaughter by age. In real life, all of it is condemnable and should be "rewarded" by extreme punishments. But depiction of such? Nope, can't see it. In Fallout 2 when I was playing the ar*ehole character, I got that "gods, I'm a bastard" feel when I annihilated the entire Wright family. But that's what comes with playing no-more-mr-nice-guy characters. When I first met Horrigan, I had similar feeling towards ... it and the Enclave goons. Alpha Protocol had some pretty shocking moments.

The point is that it reminds too much of political correctness, a practice I dearly hate and that I consider to be extremely hypocritical. Especially when coming from someone throwing words like "sick ****s" even though he/she clearly knows better. Hence my previous statement, I'm sorry it offended you.

 

Additionally, without kids the game would feel incomplete as they always do, unless it makes sense like in PS:T. With (partially) immortal kids it would feel plain dumb...

 

Then again, I get the feeling that this whole discussion is pointless as Obsidian has probably already decided everything related to the topic some time ago.

[DCParry]

This thread is a familiar one. The problem is that some (not all, not necessarily anyone in this thread) people want to rewards (both game based and emotional?) of being evil without any sort of downside. They want their crazy, free wheeling, murder-rape-kill fest regardless of in world consistency or reaction. Should the options for depraved, evil acts be included? Sure, but only if there are ramifications for the players.

 

You want to wipe out a town? Knock yourself out, but don't expect not to be shot at on sight at the next town once word gets out. Bounties on the PC's head should get progressively larger as she/he becomes more and more of a terror. And the hunters shouldn't be walking bags of XP and sell-able loot, they should be challenges that pose serious danger to the PC and the party. Finding and maintaining followers should become progressively difficult as your ruthless reputation becomes more solidified (sure you have a crap-ton of money, but working for you involves being hunted down by every city-state and kingdom on the continent). The first time I had a character utterly murdered by Legionnaire Assassins in FO:NV was both frustrating and hilarious, and really made me consider my actions for the rest of the game. That is until i became a walking murder machine, and then it was candies and kittens for everyone because screw you Caesar, I have a laser gun.

 

I also had a whole tirade against the crypto-objectivism nonsense I felt was emerging in parts of the thread, but decided that was probably just my own bias and didn't have much to do with the topic. 

[Durinax]

 

 

What's up with the rape and genocide??

How about banditry, oath-breaking, or raising a zombie? You don't need to be as extreme as a sex offender or mass murderer to be evil..? If the game ist to be about *choice* and *character development*, we don't necessarily need any such violence-porn.

 

Besides, genocide is totally modern era stuff and would break my immersion into a Renaissance world.

I am surprised you think Genocide is a modern concept. Afterall the Romans committed the most comprehensive extermination of another culture. Genocide is a concept as old as war itself.

 

 

If you are referring to the Celts, the Romans wanted to destroy them because they were rebellious, not because they were Celts. Alltogether the Romans were probably the most tolerant and culturally diverse conquerors the world has ever seen.

There is a fundamental difference between fighting another culture to imbibe them into your own, or just kiling a large number of enemies and attacking another group just for the sake of destroying them.

 

actually I was referring to Trajan and the Dacians, which it is estimated he killed in the 90's range percentile of their population and then enslaved the rest

[Bos_hybrid]

I someone that enjoys good 'evil' options, murder, theft, betrayl, genocide etc.

 

But I don't see a reason for rape. You murder someone because they are in your way. You steal something because you want more wealth/power. You betray someone because you dislike said person, or you gain something from doing so. You commit genocide because either a) you hate a race, or b) your using it to gain power, or both.

 

What would you gain from rape in an rpg? A child would be the only possibility, and their are better ways to get that. People don't rape for power(political/land)/money, they do it because of uncontrolled lust or for a power trip(domination).  

 

I enjoyed being a cannibal in FO:NV going from town to town depopulating them. Eating the important NPC's wasn't intelligent, but it was very amusing and gave gameplay benefits.

 

Rape isn't intelligent 'evil', it is not amusing to me, nor would it give any gameplay benefits. So on that basis I don't see worth in it's inclusion. Now 'if' the writers want to include NPC arcs around the subject, that's a different matter.

Edited August 3, 2013 by Bos_hybrid

[Monte Carlo]

 

   

 

 

 

Fine.... I guess one reply shouldn't start a flamewar.

 

I don't see one.

 

 

 

If I was to put it shortest way possible, I don't see any difference (on moral/evil scale) between rape and torture.

 

So torturing a prisoner for information (for example) is the same as rape? There are so many shades of grey here that the discussion becomes circular, but I'm sure you see what I mean. So, yes, there is a world of difference. From the ****-Dastardly tying a damsel to a railway track in an old silent movie, twirling his moustache, through to Jack Bauer beating up terrorists, and everything inbetween... those are all different to me than rape. I can explain this to you but I can't understand it for you.

 

 

 

 

And I certainly don't see any difference in manslaughter by age.

 

I don't want to get personal, as you have been civil, but I can't help you here. Your own moral compass is for you to consider. But, even among the most hardened criminals, harming children holds a special status as wretched. Child-murderers have to be kept separate from the general prison population once incarcerated, lest they be shivved. A prison favourite is pouring boiling water and sugar on child murderers. In almost every culture there is a strong moral and ethical imperative to protect children, even among those outlawed. Of course, there have been slaughters and massacres throughout history when children have been slain: they are remembered because the practice is outlandish.

 

 

 

The point is that it reminds too much of political correctness, a practice I dearly hate and that I consider to be extremely hypocritical.

 

I'm not known for my PC credentials. But if you think there's some sort of mendacious dichotomy between wanting to play a villain (say, for example, a Hannibal Lecter style murderer) but not wanting to play a rapist and child murderer then you, sir, are bat**** crazy.

 

 

 

Especially when coming from someone throwing words like "sick ****s" even though he/she clearly knows better. Hence my previous statement, I'm sorry it offended you.

 

I accept your apology unreservedly and thank you for it. I stand by my assertion, though, that folks on gaming forums who think that keeping rape and child murder out of games is somehow censorious are (you guessed it) bat**** crazy. And sick. People who want these things in games are disturbed.

 

 

 

Additionally, without kids the game would feel incomplete as they always do, unless it makes sense like in PS:T. With (partially) immortal kids it would feel plain dumb...

 

Props to you for not writing "it breaks my immersion."

 

tl;dr: there is a world of difference from wanting to play a morally reprehensible villain and wanting to play a rapist and child-murderer. There is no hypocrisy at play.