Yes, but that was probably more a case of technical limitations and time constraints of not being able to implement the variable of whether you were seen or not properly. In Fallout 3, they took a flawed implementation of a mechanic that measures how respected you are (see the very description) and turned it into a mechanic that measures whether you are "objectively" good or evil. As it shouldn't be.
Fallout 3: Gathering Good Karma
- Thread starter Brother None
- Start date
Yes, but that was probably more a case of technical limitations and time constraints of not being able to implement the variable of whether you were seen or not properly. In Fallout 3, they took a flawed implementation of a mechanic that measures how respected you are (see the very description) and turned it into a mechanic that measures whether you are "objectively" good or evil. As it shouldn't be.
Surely if you role play properly in the game, none of this matters. I mean if I set out to be a bad guy, then I will remain a bad guy right to the end of the game. People in the real world who have led evil lives, do on occasion, 'see the light' and change their ways. However the timeframe for this game is not a lifetime so it would be pretty odd for someone in the space of a few months to flit about the differrent reaches of karma. Just because a game mechanic is there and you can see how it can be abused to prove how ridiculous it is, dosn't mean you have to. Pretty silly thing to do, especially if it is going to spoil your enjoyment of the game.
Jim Cojones
It Wandered In From the Wastes
Dialogue option limitation is a way to force player only to role play one of the characters that designers want. Like in Mass Effect where I tried to play a character who doesn't care about anyone but isn't stupid moron so choose diplomatic dialogue options. It was possible to unlock both red and blue responses but not as quickly as when play one of the "right" ways and only due to system which was counting good and bad actions separately.
mandrake776
Still Mildly Glowing
Let's be honest. No matter how it's described, the karma system that Fallout 3's is being based on was an objective measurement of good and evil. It's as good a place as any for them to start from for their first fallout game.Ausir said:
Jim Cojones
It Wandered In From the Wastes
Is killing a raider a good deed? Can anybody say that corpse-eating is "objectively" bad? Is destroying Enclave full of innocent, not-blood-thirsty inhabitants good? Is killing every Vault City citizens bad even if it makes ghouls from Gecko safer? Is killing ghouls from Gecko bad if it stops them to poison Vault City water supplies (I know there is another way, but it's only approachable if main character has got certain skills)? Killing Master, the only one man in the Wastes who had plans to save fallen world (flawed unfortunately), is something really bad.mandrake776 said:
Fallouts were never about playing "objectively" good/bad character but you were perceived as good or bad by its world inhabitants.
mandrake776
Still Mildly Glowing
Yet you got good or bad karma for any of those things, meaning the game always had an objective definition of good and bad.Jim Cojones said:
Jim Cojones said:
mandrake776 said:
Which is a flaw in the whole karma system. How one sees an action depends on who one is; Fallout 2 which used a Faction system in addition to the karma system improved on Fallout in that regard.
So 10 years later with better tech and Beth is going to use a system that was flawed to start with?!?
Why on earth wouldn't they go with the Faction system actually fits what they say Radiant AI does?UncannyGarlic
Sonny, I Watched the Vault Bein' Built!
Read the past few pages of this thread, this has already been discussed here, and a couple times if I'm not mistaken. Progress the conversation, don't loop it back into itself.mandrake776 said:
In Fallout 1, the stat known as Karma in FO2 and FO3 was simply named "Reputation", and Karma was just the name of the character sheet tab that covered reputation and karmic traits like childkiller. It was only renamed in FO2 to avoid confusion with town reputations. "General Reputation", with the system taking into account stuff like whether you were seen or not.
mandrake776
Still Mildly Glowing
Ausir said:
So this works the same as a general reputation score. Is it that it's called karma that makes it bad?
mandrake776 said:
You misunderstood. It worked as a general reputation score.
In Fallout 3, you can lose or gain karma for doing good or evil things no matter if someone saw you do the act or not. It is comparable to - say - the alignment system in Planescape: Torment, showing a kind of inner karmic balance, it's not really comparable to how Fallout 1/2 did it.
mandrake776
Still Mildly Glowing
Yeah, that's how it is in Fallout 1 and 2. I'm not seeing a difference here.Brother None said:
mandrake776 said:
Literally 3 posts above here Ausir explains how that is not how it was in Fallout 1, and that Fallout 2 added reputation when they shifted the meaning of karma.
Dude. Literally 3 posts. What?
mandrake776
Still Mildly Glowing
I'm sorry, are you disputing the "no one saw it, yet it contributes to my karma/reputation" being the way it worked in Fallout? Does it matter whether it's called reputation or karma?Brother None said:
mandrake776 said:
Disputing? If I managed to get past Darkwater and lockpick his safe, no one cared. Stole the necklace for the Thieves Guild? No karma hit. That's how it worked in Fallout. That's not how it works in Fallout 3.
Of course Fallout never had a very good way of dealing with killings in this sense, but that was more limitations of the time than anything.
mandrake776 said:
No, it matters what it is, not what it's called.
mandrake776
Still Mildly Glowing
It's lazy implementation if it's not supposed to be an objective measure of actual karma. It's lazy enough that I always thought it was intended to be a measure of actual karma, which is why I don't have a problem with this, I guess.Brother None said: