Yahtzee: You know, I actually quite like how Assassin's Creed does it. When you come down to it, ethical codes are unique from person to person, so if a character is established with their own personality and history, and you want to judge the player's actions from a moral standpoint, it probably should be according to the moral code unique to that character rather than some amorphous idea of universal good and evil. A lot of games that have characters whose plots depend on their being good and heroic, regardless of player activities, all they can do if you start gunning down primary schools is have someone say "What the hell, man?" without further effect. The 'desync' thing is a neat way of getting around that.
Games like GTA always have to walk a bit of a tightrope when it comes to characterising the lead, they need to be someone who could believably flip out and start rampaging down the street. That's something that they did very well with Niko Bellic, a man who seems like he's no longer surprised by anything, least of all his own actions.
Mikey Neumann: I think this debate is wrapped up.
Final thought from me: Morality is only fun when both sides are fun. Sometimes being immoral is just as fun as being pious.
James Portnow: Final thought from me:There aren't two sides to morality...
Mikey Neumann: Finaler thought from me in no-way a response to Portnow's final response:
Served from: 172.31.27.243 | Version: com