The Gray Area

It seems like every game released these days has a morality system that gives the player the choice of being either a good or a bad guy. While this system is handled well in many games, and gives the player greater control over the game world, it has rarely been implemented in a way that is fully satisfying. The problem lies in the fact that games many times developers do not take into account the fact that sometimes decisions can be deeper than simple good vs. bad. There is a gray area in real life that make decisions difficult, and this is something that mainstream games have yet to really explore.

 

Let’s talk about Fallout 3 and Mass Effect. Both of these games have a very well defined system of morality. Fallout gives you negative and positive karma based on how you interact in situations and with characters in the wasteland. Now, I will start out by saying that I love Fallout 3. It is one of my favorite games of all time, but I have a lot of issues with the way the morality system is handled. Of course when you decide to blow up the village of Megaton you should get evil points, that much is clear, but little things like deciding to kill the super mutants with tainted water at the end of the game are also labeled as evil. Decisions like this one should be labeled as a neither good, or evil. It should be up to the player to decide whether or not the decision is a good or bad thing to do.

The Mass Effect series attempts to change up the morality system by making good guy decisions called Paragon, and bad guy decisions labeled as Renegade. This is interesting because renegade decisions aren’t simply “bad” they’re more like mean. If you choose renegade choices then you are more of an asshole, if you choose paragon your more of like a nice guy. This only works up until a certain point though. There are decisions in the game that have you choose between which crew member lives and which dies. When you make these decisions you get renegade or paragon decisions based upon whom you choose to die. This should not be how it works. It is so frustrating to get “bad” points after you make a decision that you thought was the “right” one, the “good” one as it were.

 

In the end it seems as though the way choice based games should play out in the future is to explore how you feel about the choices in the game yourself. The game should base itself around the decisions you make. When you decide to kill someone who you think deserves to die, you shouldn’t be given any points based on how the game designers feel about this character, the game should work around the decisions that you’ve made throughout the entirety of the title. From there the game should respond to your decision and move forward accordingly. It shouldn’t make you good or evil, it should make you, you.

Mass Effect and Heavy Rain: Breaking New Ground in Gaming

It’s easy to discount videogames as not being literature. Even as a gamer, I sometimes find it hard to talk about games in this way. I mean, seriously, have you played Gears of War 3? I don’t care how good the combat is; the dialogue and storytelling in that game are just atrocious. Then of course a game comes along that reminds us all that games can be a legitimate form of literature in their own right because they offer up a narrative structure unlike any other medium. For me, this reminder came in the form of two games: Heavy Rain and Mass Effect.

These two games are truly unique experiences because they offer up what books, movies and most games readily cannot: choice.

There is nothing quite like the choices you make in the original Mass Effect (except maybe those in the sequel). I’d love to go into detail about the anguish I went through with each of these choices, and detail what exactly made each one great, but honestly, I’d hate to ruin it for anyone who hasn’t experienced it yet. It’s just that good. The developer’s ability to make you care for the characters is really well done, and that is partly due to the fact that they are you. You choose what they look like, what their name is, whether they are male or female, and then as that character you make choices that have a ripple effect across the landscape of three games. When crewmates die, you think back to whether or not you could have done something differently to save them, perhaps invested more time in their side quests. It is this quality that makes Mass Effect truly unique, and a testament to video games as literature. Nothing in movies or books can replicate this feeling of control over the endpoint of the narrative.

Heavy Rain had the same effect on me as Mass Effect, and despite the fact that you are not able to create your own character, you still grow very attached to the cast as you guide them through the adventure. What really works about Mass Effect is the way it reveals the story. You act as an omniscient narrator of sorts who dictates the actions of four separate characters. And sure, the bad guy will always turn out the same, but besides that, the ending possibilities are endless. Interact as little as possible and the game will essentially play itself, with the adverse effect of characters deaths. This is truly unique to gaming, and is pulled off incredibly well in this title. This is what separates this games from Chooseyourownadventure books. There is no real way to read a book wrong, you either read it or you don’t. In Heavy rain, bad decisions or performing poorly will result in adverse effects on the characters and story. In fact, this is what makes Heavy Rain an even better example than Mass Effect. Mass Effect lets the player start over if they die, after all it is an action game, and your gonna die a lot if you suck like me. In Heavy Rain if you die, then that character is dead, end of story.

In the end I feel these two games are worth pointing out because they seem to pushing the medium forward. Proving that videogames deserve a place in the canon of literature.