Fallout 3: Gathering Good Karma

[mandrake776]

The purpose is that you play the game in all possible ways and get all the achievements! CHA-CHING!

So, if I play a good character, then become a mass murderer, as long as I collect some fingers I can be a good guy again?

Bleh... that's a shittier "moral" system than Bioshock had.

Because you couldn't do similar things in Fallout and Fallout 2?

 

[Jim Cojones]

Because you couldn't do similar things in Fallout and Fallout 2?

In Fallout 1/2 when you're a childkiller/berserker/slaver there's no possibility of becoming good again. You could get good karma but still people treat you as evil guy.

 

[rcorporon]

Because you couldn't do similar things in Fallout and Fallout 2?

Actually, you couldn't.

Load up FO1 or 2, waste some children, and let me know how it works out for you in the long run trying to become a "good guy" again.

Beth just wants the hype machine to say things like "moral choices" when they really mean "same crap as Oblivion."

 

[mandrake776]

You can't get rid of the childkiller trait, certainly, but you could kill everyone but the children in klamath and the den and still end up with overwhelmingly positive karma and be idolized everywhere but those two towns.

 

[ookami]

Because you couldn't do similar things in Fallout and Fallout 2?

Because stupid is an excuse/justification for even more stupid instead of improvement?

 

[mandrake776]

When it comes to not limiting gameplay, I hardly think it's stupid. Instead of wandering the wastes looking for bad guys to kill to raise your karma, they gave you a couple ways to do it that are repeatable so if you really want to, you can do it faster than you used to be able to. They know that people will want to be able to change it, so they thought of a reasonable way to do so.

 

[Anarchosyn]

Anyhow, it wasn't like Fallout 1 or 2 were perfect. At the time I saw them as very good titles that (I had assumed) would be surpassed by the next big thing. They were developmental stepping stones.

Sadly, as the "next big thing" came about, they seemed to be taking steps backwards. For example, Baldur's Gate made me cringe with its pathetic faux depth in dialog (i.e. most answers brought you to the same result). Nowadays, I look back at Baldur's Gate as a high water mark in cRPG design (*ironically!*). That's less a compliment to BG and more a commentary on the sorry state of modern RPGs post Arcanum, but I digress.. (and Arcanum was fraught with its own plethora of problems, believe me - I was a beta tester).

The Karma system in Fallout 1 and 2 is a great example of this. I thought the system was cute but really felt it was a stepping stone to greater depth later on. Sure, it was a decent litmus and archival mechanism of one's actions but it wasn't really utilized in game for a lot. I pined for more characters to read and interact with this data in some fashion. Nowadays, it's a high water mark (well, actually KotoR II is the high water mark in this respect, sadly, but it's fitting it was developed by x-Black Isle employees).

I expect FO3 Karma to be lost in its own nostalgia; barely living up to a past that we should have evolved beyond ages ago. Perhaps it'll be almost as involved as Oblivions "fame" and "infamy" counters. /sarcasm.

 

[FeelTheRads]

You can't get rid of the childkiller trait, certainly, but you could kill everyone but the children in klamath and the den and still end up with overwhelmingly positive karma and be idolized everywhere but those two towns.

Yeah... and? Again, this isn't like in Fallout 3. Apparently in Fallout 3 you can get the same city you just slaughtered to like you again.

 

[marko2te]

Alignment systems are restrictive to roleplaying, not always dialogue options. That said, there are games where people will or will not even talk to you if your alignment isn't in the right zone which is the closest there is to what you suggest. Still, restricting dialogue options based on such an abstract concept is ridiculous. What about a Robin Hood of the wastes? What about Mad Max? What you're suggesting doing would shoehorn people into even more limited play styles and disallow characters from treating NPCs whom they like more or less differently.

Yes i believe that limitations are a good thing, and i think that being only neutral and good or evil and neutral at the same time is more realistic then being able to be evil and good at anytime, of course with ability to change his alignment.
Robin Hood was a good guy who helped people by giving them money which he stole from evil people and in the same time he tried help to put rightful ruler on the throne. I see his actions as neutral good and giving a player who tries to roleplay him only good and neutral dialog choices not a bad thing. As for Mad max he is neutral by definition and would have access to all of dialog. As i said iam trying to make up a system that removes something i hate an a ability to be Jesus and Devil at the same time. Also in realism there are very few actually good people, Dostoevsky said about his story Idiot that to make a truly good person realistic he would need to make him a idiot.

All in all, reputation works far better than alignment because it's based on actions and is substantial rather than the abstract idea of alignment and serves all of the same practical needs.

I completely agree

 

[Ad Astra]

Because you couldn't do similar things in Fallout and Fallout 2?

Let's say you get hired by Pizza Hut as a delivery boy. The fellow you're replacing was fired because he never delivered any pizzas. So, would it be okay for you to never deliver any pizzas as well? After all, the guy before you didn't, either!

 

[Buxbaum666]

When it comes to not limiting gameplay, I hardly think it's stupid. Instead of wandering the wastes looking for bad guys to kill to raise your karma, they gave you a couple ways to do it that are repeatable so if you really want to, you can do it faster than you used to be able to. They know that people will want to be able to change it, so they thought of a reasonable way to do so.

Not limiting gameplay? That's easy: put a karma-slider (-100 -- 0 -- 100 ) into the menu. That'd be basically the same thing. That way, the player doesn't have to bother with boring rollplaying and can instead adjust his karma any way he wants. Great fun!

 

[ookami]

When it comes to not limiting gameplay, I hardly think it's stupid.

Yeah, I mean we wouldn't want those pesky lasting consequences that actually shape the path of your character and are a major element of Fallout's design to get in the way of fun fun fun for everyone, everyday in every way at the cost of everything else, now would we? Wouldn't want to potentially frustrate someone who can't even wipe their own nose competently, after all.

Serious question. Are you actually a gamer (even a fan of Fallout) or are you just from the marketing department at Bethesda? It just seems like you're bent on excusing, justifying, defending and/or praising everything Bethesda does because it's good from a marketing standpoint more than or even rather than from a quality design standpoint. I really don't understand why anyone on the consumer side of things would take that position of defense.

 

[rcorporon]

I'd take "limited gameplay" over "broken moral system" any day of the week.

I'm pretty sure that if something is to be "immersive" it needs to be believable. If I lay waste to 3/4 of Megaton's population (except those pesky, non-killable npc's,) and return 24 hours later with the fingers of a bunch of dead guys, all of a sudden I'm a saviour again?

Give me a break.

 

[Public]

When it comes to not limiting gameplay, I hardly think it's stupid. Instead of wandering the wastes looking for bad guys to kill to raise your karma, they gave you a couple ways to do it that are repeatable so if you really want to, you can do it faster than you used to be able to. They know that people will want to be able to change it, so they thought of a reasonable way to do so.

Not limiting gameplay? That's easy: put a karma-slider (-100 -- 0 -- 100 ) into the menu. That'd be basically the same thing. That way, the player doesn't have to bother with boring rollplaying and can instead adjust his karma any way he wants. Great fun!

Beth should come up with an idea like this:

"We thought that being evil or good wouldn't give the player us much fun, so we decided to get rid of the karma, and let the player do whatever he/she wants. Thanks to this, even if the player blew up the Megaton, the city will still be untouched, so you can continue to be good (doing quests for the good people in Megaton) and evil (to continue new openned quests after blowing up the Megaton)."

When I was playing previous Fallouts, usually, I wasn't thinking how good or bad my karma was. I didn't give a shit about it, I was doing what I thought was right. And then o the end "Cool...most people like me". Few times happend, that for some, unknown reasons, I was "Wanted" in Reading or Gecko- maybe a bug, but you never know, because in Fallout is pretty hard to finish the game exactly like you finished it before. That's why this game was so interesting and not easy to get bored playing it.

 

[mandrake776]

Because you couldn't do similar things in Fallout and Fallout 2?

Let's say you get hired by Pizza Hut as a delivery boy. The fellow you're replacing was fired because he never delivered any pizzas. So, would it be okay for you to never deliver any pizzas as well? After all, the guy before you didn't, either!

The fellow I'm replacing wasn't fired, he died, and all I ever hear is how fucking great that guy was and why can't I be more like him, including how I look... that's a bit more the feeling one gets from here.

When I was playing previous Fallouts, usually, I wasn't thinking how good or bad my karma was. I didn't give a shit about it, I was doing what I thought was right. And then o the end "Cool...most people like me". Few times happend, that for some, unknown reasons, I was "Wanted" in Reading or Gecko- maybe a bug, but you never know, because in Fallout is pretty hard to finish the game exactly like you finished it before. That's why this game was so interesting and not easy to get bored playing it.

So not caring about your karma is the right way to play the game? I ask because you seem to know which is the right approved way and which isn't.

 

[Deleted member 53669]

So not caring about your karma is the right way to play the game? I ask because you seem to know which is the right approved way and which isn't.

He didn't force you to accept his ideas in anyway. Lay off.


If this is a serious question, NO it's not. There is no right or wrong way, but everything you do has consequences. Thats the whole point Bethesda is missing.

Karma in F1/F2 is a consequence of your actions, not a direct choice of how you play the game.

 

[mandrake776]

Karma in F1/F2 is a consequence of your actions, not a direct choice of how you play the game.

Here's the point, it will be in Fallout 3 as well. If you don't want to utilize the quests that help you change karma, don't. The idea is that there are people who will want to do so, and giving them a reasonable way to do it (as I said before, it's possible, but harder in the other games) doesn't seem like a bad thing. More options for people who want more options. For people who don't want them... that's why they're called "options".

 

[Brother None]

Yay the just ignore it solution pops in

Guys guys let's ignore it and it'll no longer be a problem. Hurrrraaaay!

 

[mandrake776]

Yay the just ignore it solution pops in

Guys guys let's ignore it and it'll no longer be a problem. Hurrrraaaay!

You know, I don't really like using heavy weapons in Fallout. I prefer light weapons and aimed shots. But, I understand that other people like heavy weapons, so I don't get mad that they're in the game.

 

[Deleted member 53669]

Yay the just ignore it solution pops in

Guys guys let's ignore it and it'll no longer be a problem. Hurrrraaaay!

You know, I don't really like using heavy weapons in Fallout. I prefer light weapons and aimed shots. But, I understand that other people like heavy weapons, so I don't get mad that they're in the game.

The Karma system isn't turned off or on for people who ignore it or not in F1, it's always there. If you hit someone in the face with a sledgehammer, some consequences are going to happen to you in some way. Deal with it, or don't hit anybody. Choosing to ignore a giant unstoppable force in the game isn't an option. I wish I could do the same with with my landlord, or an oncomming bus on the freeway. The karma system in F1/F2 wasn't perfect, but it was a force that wasn't stoppable by just "Ignoring it" It happened, rather you paid attention of not.

The "Pick and Choose" karma in F3 is actually a step backwards from an already flawed system in the first games. It's basically the equivalant of turning on a "Moral God Mode" and being invincible to consequences. They screwed up the idea of "Grey area" choices bad.


But anyways... The whole theme of F3 is turning into..

For Bethesda, and the Karma system as well.