Game News Brian Fargo on moral dilemmas in Wasteland 2

[almondblight]

Baldur's Gate actually almost had some good moral dilemmas, though it pulled back and gave the player the "right choice" in the end. For example, the case where the artist stole some jewels to complete his masterpiece - do you stop the law from taking him in? Well, it's solved for you because the mercenary that's sent tries to kill you if you talk to him. Or the lumberjacks that don't realize they're cutting down the dryads trees, but the dryads aren't able to communicate with them, and they don't believe random strangers about why they should give up their livelihood. Fortunately for the player, they attack him if you try to talk with them, so you don't need to think. There are a few others that would have required some thought - the fights between the druid and the merchant, the townspeople and that water priestess, or being hired by that bard to protect that witch, but they also ended with the right choice being shown.

The ideas were decent and at least showed an understanding that dilemmas should be good against good, even if the developers got nervous at the end and pulled back.

 

[Mrowak]

FFS, I thought we agreed. That's not a moral dilemma in any dimensions, and certainly not a practical one.

Yes it is. You have two viable choices, each with moral consequences you're not happy with.

What moral consequences? What is the moral consequence of killing all raiders? Some other people might hate you? But that's not moral consequence... it's pragmatic consequence.

That the husband is and idiot and let's himself get killed, because other refused to help him (it may have nothing to do with being moral - th e party is ill-equipped, heavily wounded, and simply incapable of offering help)? Where morality factors in that?

Also, it's not a hard choice for anyone - you pick the quest like any other and do it by default to get xp and gear. Only then you figure out then most optimal way to solve it - which is taking the woman from the raiders.

 

[Vault Dweller]

Infinitron

I don't assume the worst. I simply know how RPGs work and so do you, but for some inexplicable reasons you want to believe that WL2 will have a radically different design. We should hope that WL2 will be a great RPG, a well designed RPG, not that it will redesign and reinvent RPGs, no?

Can you name me a game where you weren't able to roll over everything? In all top 10 RPGs my character/party were able to kill anyone they went against, which didn't stop them from being top 10 RPGs. Do you have any reasons to believe that Fargo is changing the formula radically?

 

[Infinitron]

What moral consequences? What is the moral consequence of killing all raiders? Some other people might hate you? But that's not moral consequence... it's pragmatic consequence.

That the husband is and idiot and let's himself get killed, because other refused to help him (it may have nothing to do with being moral - th e party is ill-equipped, heavily wounded, and simply incapable of offering help)? Where morality factors in that?

Also, it's not a hard choice for anyone - you pick the quest like any other and do it by default to get xp and gear. Only then you figure out then most optimal way to solve it - which is taking the woman from the raiders.

I'm not talking about that example in particular. I am describing a situation that might arise in a hypothetical Fargo-style "non-dilemma dilemma".

 

[skuphundaku]

No. If I can't do something but really want to, it's not a moral dilemma. At all.

I disagree. It is a moral dilemma in practice - you need to choose between one of your non-optimal choices.

FFS, I thought we agreed. That's not a moral dilemma in any dimensions, and certainly not a practical one.

Want to know what would be a moral dilemma? If the raiders were the only force in the area that protected nearby villages from mutant raids, and they took slaves as a tribute from the villagers. Killing all those people just to save one woman and condemning the rest to die. And only in this one dimension it is a moral dilemma (so, e.g. bailing her out, is still not a dilemma, so it's the most optimal choice)

Another example: You go the peaceful route and pay the money for her. It turns out, however, that the woman does not want to return to her abusing husband and a bunch of wailing brats - she feels she is treated better by the raiders. She also doesn't want to take car of the kids, because she claims she was raped by her husband. So what you do now? Let the woman do as she pleases or drag her back to her husband? That's a moral dilemma.

You people should cut it out with all this "moral dilemma" wankery. What is a moral dilemma for some may be an easy decision for others. Stop trying to impose your morality on other people, FFS!

 

[Infinitron]

I simply know how RPGs work

That's your problem. You know too well, you're jaded as fuck. You're no longer able to approach these games with wide eyes and accept the fantasy.

That's true for all of us here to an extent, of course, but you seem to have it particularly badly.

 

[Mrowak]

I'm not talking about that example in particular. I am describing a situation that might arise in a hypothetical Fargo-style "non-dilemma dilemma".

In other words you are deluding yourself into thinking that Fargo came up with something that you'd like to appear - which he didn't prove at any point.

 

[VentilatorOfDoom]

I'm pretty sure Vault Dweller didn't even weep a bit when this kid was killed at the beginning of ME3, that's how jaded he is.

 

[Jaesun]

 

[Vault Dweller]

I simply know how RPGs work

That's your problem. You know too well, you're jaded as fuck. You're no longer able to approach these games with wide eyes.

I'm not sure I understand.

I like RPGs. 99.9% RPGs work a certain way, which didn't stop people on this forum from liking them. Best games we praise and vote for work exactly the same way. You could (and some people did) wipe out every town in Fallout 1 and 2, for example, and some quests and combat encounters (like taking the farm back from the raiders) were extremely enjoyable. There is absolutely nothing wrong with bringing frontier justice to WL2 and I'm excited about it a lot. So, why would you call expecting WL2 to work the same way as all other RPGs, including all top 10 RPGs, jaded and negative approach?

I'm genuinely curious.

 

[Infinitron]

I'm pretty sure Vault Dweller didn't even weep a bit when this kid was killed at the beginning of ME3, that's how jaded he is.

That's not what I'm talking about. There's a difference between not falling for cinematic emotional manipulation and being cynical about a game's core mechanics.

Then surely you're familiar with the basic concept - your party grows very powerful very fast and can steam roll over anything. RPGs are filled with NPCs with problems that are usually solved by violence because violence is fun

 

[Vault Dweller]

I'm pretty sure Vault Dweller didn't even weep a bit when this kid was killed at the beginning of ME3, that's how jaded he is.

Almost fell out of my chair laughing. That fucking kid...

 

[Infinitron]

I simply know how RPGs work

That's your problem. You know too well, you're jaded as fuck. You're no longer able to approach these games with wide eyes.

I'm not sure I understand.

I like RPGs. 99.9% RPGs work a certain way, which didn't stop people on this forum from liking them. Best games we praise and vote for work exactly the same way. You could (and some people did) wipe out every town in Fallout 1 and 2, for example, and some quests and combat encounters (like taking the farm back from the raiders) were extremely enjoyable. There is absolutely nothing wrong with bringing frontier justice to WL2 and I'm excited about it a lot. So, why would you call expecting WL2 to work the same way as all other RPGs, including all top 10 RPGs, jaded and negative approach?

I'm genuinely curious.

Your problem is that you aren't able to achieve the cognitive dissonance of taking the setting seriously while simultaneously acknowledging those things. "LOL, I CAN STEAMROLL ANYTHING, MORALITY HAS NO MEANING, I AM TEH UBERMENSCH"

 

[Vault Dweller]

I'm pretty sure Vault Dweller didn't even weep a bit when this kid was killed at the beginning of ME3, that's how jaded he is.

That's not what I'm talking about. There's a difference between not falling for cinematic emotional manipulation and being cynical about a game's core mechanics.

Then surely you're familiar with the basic concept - your party grows very powerful very fast and can steam roll over anything. RPGs are filled with NPCs with problems that are usually solved by violence because violence is fun

It's not true?

What do you expect from WL2 anyway? That your party won't grow powerful and will live in fear, hiding from powerful enemies? They didn't seem fazed by a giant fucking robot, I can tell you that much.

 

[Mrowak]

Your problem is that you aren't able to achieve the cognitive dissonance of taking the setting seriously while simultaneously acknowledging those things. "LOL, I CAN STEAMROLL ANYTHING, MORALITY HAS NO MEANING, I AM TEH UBERMENSCH"

Has it been proved that it does?

 

[Vault Dweller]

I simply know how RPGs work

That's your problem. You know too well, you're jaded as fuck. You're no longer able to approach these games with wide eyes.

I'm not sure I understand.

I like RPGs. 99.9% RPGs work a certain way, which didn't stop people on this forum from liking them. Best games we praise and vote for work exactly the same way. You could (and some people did) wipe out every town in Fallout 1 and 2, for example, and some quests and combat encounters (like taking the farm back from the raiders) were extremely enjoyable. There is absolutely nothing wrong with bringing frontier justice to WL2 and I'm excited about it a lot. So, why would you call expecting WL2 to work the same way as all other RPGs, including all top 10 RPGs, jaded and negative approach?

I'm genuinely curious.

Your problem is that you aren't able to achieve the cognitive dissonance of taking the setting seriously while simultaneously acknowledging those things. "LOL, I CAN STEAMROLL ANYTHING, MORALITY HAS NO MEANING, I AM TEH UBERMENSCH"

Well, it is hard to take the threats and "moral dilemmas' seriously if you know that you'll just go there and kill the sons of bitches.

 

[Infinitron]

Well, it is hard to take the threats and "moral dilemmas' seriously if you know that you'll just go there and kill the sons of bitches.

It can be hard. I think that's why folks on the Codex tend to care so much about things like atmosphere, music and setting, things that don't seem immediately relevant to the grognard - because those things can help maintain the illusion.

(Creepy music and graphics? Maybe I should be scared - even though I'm packing a turbo plasma rifle with power armor and can one-shot anything.)

But I think most people do achieve it.

 

[Mrowak]

It can be hard. I think that's why folks on the Codex tend to care so much about things like atmosphere, music and setting, things that don't seem immediately relevant to the grognard - because those things can help maintain the illusion.

(Creepy music and graphics? Maybe I should be scared - even though I'm packing a turbo plasma rifle with power armor and can one-shot anything.)

But I think most people do achieve it.

Achieve what? I am very curious. Certainly not moral dilemma. Immersion maybe? But if you know that there's no moral dilemma to the party, then how it is achieved?

 

[GreyViper]

How about if one of your rangers gets taken hostage/gangraped? And your choices are to leave him or kill all the raiders, but if you do they'll certainly execute the ranger before you can get to him. And the middle path is that you dress in drag and pretend to be a prostitute to get him out stealthily, but once you do the whole wasteland will hear about it and you'll never get any respect again.

Why does this remind me of Will SMiths "Wild, wild West" so much, not that the movie was worth anything.

 

[Vault Dweller]

Well, it is hard to take the threats and "moral dilemmas' seriously if you know that you'll just go there and kill the sons of bitches.

It can be hard. I think that's why folks on the Codex tend to care so much about things like atmosphere, music and setting, things that don't seem immediately relevant to the grognard - because those things can help maintain the illusion.

(Creepy music and graphics? Maybe I should be scared - even though I'm packing a turbo plasma rifle with power armor and can one-shot anything.)

But I think most people do achieve it.

That's larping, bro.

I remember very similar arguments coming from Bethesda fans (no offense to you, good sir) when Oblivion was released. "You guys are too jaded, it's your own fault you can't enjoy the quests and the world and just immerse yourself."

Sure, it can be scary when you go into the deathclaw den for the first time not knowing what to expect, but overall, when an NPC asks you to help him solve a problem in a violent way, you know that you up to the task. It's what makes RPGs fun.

 

[Infinitron]

It can be hard. I think that's why folks on the Codex tend to care so much about things like atmosphere, music and setting, things that don't seem immediately relevant to the grognard - because those things can help maintain the illusion.

(Creepy music and graphics? Maybe I should be scared - even though I'm packing a turbo plasma rifle with power armor and can one-shot anything.)

But I think most people do achieve it.

Achieve what? I am very curious. Certainly not moral dilemma. Immersion maybe? But if you know that there's no moral dilemma to the party, then how it is achieved?

I'm not sure if we're talking specifically about moral dilemmas anymore.

VD believes he's good enough at RPGs that he can win any combat. So, for him, if there's any choice that has the downside of putting the player in dangerous combat situations, that downside isn't a downside at all - even if from the "in-character" perspective it should be a more serious dilemma.

In other words, in what universe does the moral dilemma exist - the player's universe ("I CAN KILL ANYTHING IN THIS GAME") or the character's ingame universe?

 

[VentilatorOfDoom]

Sure, it can be scary when you go into the deathclaw den for the first time not knowing what to expect, but overall, when an NPC asks you to help him solve a problem in a violent way, you know that you up to the task. It's what makes RPGs fun.

If this is what makes RPGs fun, why did you do it differently in AoD? I mean it can easily happen that an NPC asks you to do something and you're not up to the task.

 

[Vault Dweller]

How about if one of your rangers gets taken hostage/gangraped? And your choices are to leave him or kill all the raiders, but if you do they'll certainly execute the ranger before you can get to him. And the middle path is that you dress in drag and pretend to be a prostitute to get him out stealthily, but once you do the whole wasteland will hear about it and you'll never get any respect again.the raiders show up and you have to let them fuck you.

Not THAT is a moral dilemma.

 

[Infinitron]

That's larping, bro.

If that's larping then so be it. For me "LARPing" is only gay if it's about collecting flowers or praying at altars or some such.

 

[Mrowak]

I'm not sure if we're talking specifically about moral dilemmas anymore.

VD believes he's good enough at RPGs that he can win any combat. So, for him, if there's any choice that has the downside of putting the player in dangerous combat situations, that downside isn't a downside at all - even if from the "in-character" perspective it should be a more serious dilemma.

In other words, in what universe does the moral dilemma exist - the player's universe ("I CAN KILL ANYTHING IN THIS GAME") or the character's ingame universe?

It should exist in both universes with the situation at hand chalenging both player's and PC's worldview. And in order to be effective cannot be overuled by commone sense and other moral dilemmas (I will throw away everything and risk the well-being of the people I am responsible for - my party - to save some random woman I don't know anything about).

Else, as VD says - it's you playing scenario in your own head. It's not that different from conspiracy theory from ME3 - Biodrones did exactly that - created a narrative that would fit their expectations.

Beside's the presented dilemma is irrlevant, because you will take quest any way - to get xp and gear. You might tell yourself that it's because your rangers are noble, but well - it's deluding yourself.