What is the appeal of playing as “evil”?

[lukaszek]

RPGs almost never put any consequences behind being the most altruistic person ever.

remember helping friendly ghouls around tempeny tower?

 

[solemgar]

This is one of the reasons I liked Tyranny premise. There is no choice to make. You work for an evil regime and are full part of it.

Even so , I liked playing it as an enforcer of the same, trying to be fair with people who abide and ruthless with whoever breaks the law.

 

[solemgar]

Most games punish harshly or are less beneficial if you do an evil playthrough. I would like to see one game (apart from Tyranny) where this is strongly encouraged. Even in Torment, being evil locked you from better powers/items.

Even so, as mentioned before, and evil playthrough of Planescape Torment is very entertaining and thematic. How far will you go to save your own skin?

 

[EvilWolf]

While browsing the internets for opinions and reflections on rpgs I came across few but very vocal “evil players” that worship their evil waifus and derive this immense gratification out of their paths. I always found it silly or nonsensical but now it makes me wonder, why?

For clarification, I am a proud lawful good enjoyer. I pick a paladin, almost always prioritize the wellbeing of game characters and punish evildoers and lawbreakers.
Therefore it is difficult for me to grasp why one would choose an evil path to hurt others, corrupt innocent and just in general fuck with and destroy everything.
The idea of negatively affecting/hurting anyone, even my enemy does not bring me joy or pleasure.

I develop small games and my dream is to make my own rpg. For that reason I'd like to make sense of the other side. It is essential to grasp the full picture to create a truly engaging piece of media rather than just forcing people to play like my autistically righteous self.

Thus I ask, what is the appeal of playing an evil path? What do you get out of it? What makes it interesting? What sort of feeling are you pursuing?
Is it to let out steam? To feel in control? Is it a morbid curiosity of what would happen if you chose these options?
What games cater to your wants the best?
Lay it out here and perhaps I will be able to deepen my understanding.

Bold words for someone with an Edea avatar.

 

[solemgar]

While browsing the internets for opinions and reflections on rpgs I came across few but very vocal “evil players” that worship their evil waifus and derive this immense gratification out of their paths. I always found it silly or nonsensical but now it makes me wonder, why?

For clarification, I am a proud lawful good enjoyer. I pick a paladin, almost always prioritize the wellbeing of game characters and punish evildoers and lawbreakers.
Therefore it is difficult for me to grasp why one would choose an evil path to hurt others, corrupt innocent and just in general fuck with and destroy everything.
The idea of negatively affecting/hurting anyone, even my enemy does not bring me joy or pleasure.

I develop small games and my dream is to make my own rpg. For that reason I'd like to make sense of the other side. It is essential to grasp the full picture to create a truly engaging piece of media rather than just forcing people to play like my autistically righteous self.

Thus I ask, what is the appeal of playing an evil path? What do you get out of it? What makes it interesting? What sort of feeling are you pursuing?
Is it to let out steam? To feel in control? Is it a morbid curiosity of what would happen if you chose these options?
What games cater to your wants the best?
Lay it out here and perhaps I will be able to deepen my understanding.

Bold words for someone with an Edea avatar.

Edea did nothing wrong

 

[Iucounu]

RPGs almost never put any consequences behind being the most altruistic person ever. You can always save everyone and usually get rewarded with the best loot also. There's no sacrifice involved in being the ultra goody two shoes.

I think there should be sacrifice in the form of more challenging gameplay. Make the player earn the most desired outcomes. This may apply both to Good and Evil playstyles, by the way.

Would if being that super good character meant you lost an attribute point for a story related reason or a popular companion died due to you being overly altruistic. Now we're actually challenging the player: are you sure you're willing to make real sacrifices to be altruistic?

Playing games is about winning, finding solutions, overcoming gameplay challenges. The above paltry rewards are an insult to a real gamer, and should only be reserved for mediocre storyfags; those that are not willing to work for the best and hardest outcome. Witcher 3's Cronie plot is an example of how not to do it: all the outcomes are bad no matter how skilled the player is. I even recall there was a trick (exploit?) related to the trapped spirit under the tree, that the devs could have let a skilled player use to get a win-win outcome, but I guess CDPR doesn't make games for gamers.

 

[Iucounu]

Almost every game has a mandatory gotcha encounter with fair maiden screaming for help from the deep wood, but that aside, game developers are too much of a pussy to acknowledge that being a wandering do-gooder means being a guy everyone is taking advantage of and laughing behind his back.

This can be true, and it becomes especially silly when the game's "morality system" punishes the player for not falling for every hard-luck story he's served. Have the writers never heard of Nigeria scams?

That said, what kind of game is more fun: the one where you save a grateful maiden, or the one where all maidens are just trying to trick you? Maybe a game could have a little of everything: most of the screaming maidens should be in real danger; a few may also warn you that they're being used by bandits to trick naive heroes; and even fewer may actually try to trick the hero herself.

 

[Iucounu]

The vast majority of books, movies, TV series and games end up with the good guys winning, no matter how improbable it is considering the setting. The main character(s) will save the day and will range from being a total goodie-two-shoes to somewhat flawed individuals. The bad guys will either be defeated, killed, or will redeem themselves in the end. How many times can you read/watch/play that stuff before it gets boring?

That's the archetypal ending in adventure stories and should always be used, otherwise it's no longer an adventure story. But also keep in mind that we can never be 100% sure what the writer has in mind until the end --maybe he'll disappoint the reader with a bad ending after all!

At some point, it feels pointless to start something, because you more or less you know the outcome anyway.

The same can be said for taking a roller coaster ride in an amusement park. People expect to survive it, but they're thrilled by the ride anyway. If an adventure story fails to thrill us because we (think that we) know the outcome it's just poorly written. If you don't like that the protagonist succeeds at the end, maybe the writer has failed at making you symphatize with the protagonist?

Then come the exceptions. Something like No Country for Old Men, which just tells a story. It doesn't really teach you anything (aside from the fact that real life is not like movies I guess), there's no moral at the end, the bad guy survives largely unchanged and presumably continues to do what he did.

In real life bad outcomes are often to be expected, and on top of that reality often surpasses fiction. Why would one want to read stories that are just a lamer version of real life?

It's refreshing to just enjoy a story that isn't trying to teach, moralize or attack you with propaganda.

On the contrary, for me an acceptable excuse for a bad ending might be if the writer is able to educate me about say how to deal with psychopaths or general bad luck in life. Perhaps by using a naive protagonist as a warning example.

 

[damager]

While browsing the internets for opinions and reflections on rpgs I came across few but very vocal “evil players” that worship their evil waifus and derive this immense gratification out of their paths. I always found it silly or nonsensical but now it makes me wonder, why?

For clarification, I am a proud lawful good enjoyer. I pick a paladin, almost always prioritize the wellbeing of game characters and punish evildoers and lawbreakers.
Therefore it is difficult for me to grasp why one would choose an evil path to hurt others, corrupt innocent and just in general fuck with and destroy everything.
The idea of negatively affecting/hurting anyone, even my enemy does not bring me joy or pleasure.

I develop small games and my dream is to make my own rpg. For that reason I'd like to make sense of the other side. It is essential to grasp the full picture to create a truly engaging piece of media rather than just forcing people to play like my autistically righteous self.

Thus I ask, what is the appeal of playing an evil path? What do you get out of it? What makes it interesting? What sort of feeling are you pursuing?
Is it to let out steam? To feel in control? Is it a morbid curiosity of what would happen if you chose these options?
What games cater to your wants the best?
Lay it out here and perhaps I will be able to deepen my understanding.

Bold words for someone with an Edea avatar.

Edea did nothing wrong

Pretty sure everybody that tried to activly follow the story of Final Fantasy 8 started to get brain damage somewhere into cd3. Me included

 

[Louis_Cypher]

The vast majority of books, movies, TV series and games end up with the good guys winning, no matter how improbable it is considering the setting. The main character(s) will save the day and will range from being a total goodie-two-shoes to somewhat flawed individuals. The bad guys will either be defeated, killed, or will redeem themselves in the end. How many times can you read/watch/play that stuff before it gets boring? At some point, it feels pointless to start something, because you more or less you know the outcome anyway.

Then come the exceptions. Something like No Country for Old Men, which just tells a story.

It would make for a pretty boring RPG to just have things happen to you, with no exercise of your initiative. It's about exercising your will at the end of the day. And the protagonists winning is archetypical for a reason. If something is boring, it's not the archetype's fault, but this particular manifestation of the archetype being insufficient, I maintain.

 

[lukaszek]

or the one where all maidens are just trying to trick you?

ill save poor militiades any time

 

[Beastro]

Because I'm good enough in every day life as it is and like to have some fun chuckling at the messed up stuff you can do in games.

With that said, I much prefer to "emergently" be evil when the game makes no judgment on it than play evil in the way the game thinks.

By that, I mean being a murderous stalker in Thief that chases the unarmed civilians around before vanishing as they run into a room and discover the mound of dead guards I put there, or the planet's main source of human skin to merchants on Rimworld, not how a game like KOTOR thinks being evil is with their silly choices.

The bigger question is "Why play good in games?", imo. The only times that I did was playing MMOs where I could really hurt people, but even then, I'd play a moral asshole who wouldn't kill people more than a few times in a day.

 

[Beastro]

rather than the good path being unambiguously more rewarding in every way.

That's the worst. Doing good should be a reward unto its own, no? IRL, everyone who's anyone has got there by being the most ruthless, psychopathic motherfucker in the pack.

Enter games. "What, you don't want to help the chicken cross the road? That's it, we're withholding loot, xp and content as your punishment for being mean!"

I thought about this and thought a neat differentiation might be to give good players something and evil ones another thing.

Say, good players get more exp but evil players get more/better equipment. One path has evils hoovering up loot demanding rewards from quests and killing/stealing for things and so rely on geat more while good players rely on their skills more as they have a higher level from the greater exp they receive not getting many rewards from doing things.

 

[Beastro]

Pretty much always find evil or "evil" companions more appealing, for example in Arcanum or BG2.

Not sure why but I just enjoy edgy shit in games, RPGs are no exception.

 

[UndeadHalfOrc]

While browsing the internets for opinions and reflections on rpgs I came across few but very vocal “evil players” that worship their evil waifus and derive this immense gratification out of their paths. I always found it silly or nonsensical but now it makes me wonder, why?

For clarification, I am a proud lawful good enjoyer. I pick a paladin, almost always prioritize the wellbeing of game characters and punish evildoers and lawbreakers.
Therefore it is difficult for me to grasp why one would choose an evil path to hurt others, corrupt innocent and just in general fuck with and destroy everything.
The idea of negatively affecting/hurting anyone, even my enemy does not bring me joy or pleasure.

I develop small games and my dream is to make my own rpg. For that reason I'd like to make sense of the other side. It is essential to grasp the full picture to create a truly engaging piece of media rather than just forcing people to play like my autistically righteous self.

Thus I ask, what is the appeal of playing an evil path? What do you get out of it? What makes it interesting? What sort of feeling are you pursuing?
Is it to let out steam? To feel in control? Is it a morbid curiosity of what would happen if you chose these options?
What games cater to your wants the best?
Lay it out here and perhaps I will be able to deepen my understanding.

Bold words for someone with an Edea avatar.

Edea did nothing wrong

Pretty sure everybody that tried to activly follow the story of Final Fantasy 8 started to get brain damage somewhere into cd3. Me included

... that said, I enjoyed FF8 quite a bit. Because of its unique quirky mechanics, not despite them.
The final dungeon is my favorite in the whole series, tied with FF6's.

 

[vota DC]

My whole good path comes down to asking myself "What would the UN do?" and then do the opposite

Funnier but shorter. You can play forever if you do the same of UN but would be boring.

 

[damager]

While browsing the internets for opinions and reflections on rpgs I came across few but very vocal “evil players” that worship their evil waifus and derive this immense gratification out of their paths. I always found it silly or nonsensical but now it makes me wonder, why?

For clarification, I am a proud lawful good enjoyer. I pick a paladin, almost always prioritize the wellbeing of game characters and punish evildoers and lawbreakers.
Therefore it is difficult for me to grasp why one would choose an evil path to hurt others, corrupt innocent and just in general fuck with and destroy everything.
The idea of negatively affecting/hurting anyone, even my enemy does not bring me joy or pleasure.

I develop small games and my dream is to make my own rpg. For that reason I'd like to make sense of the other side. It is essential to grasp the full picture to create a truly engaging piece of media rather than just forcing people to play like my autistically righteous self.

Thus I ask, what is the appeal of playing an evil path? What do you get out of it? What makes it interesting? What sort of feeling are you pursuing?
Is it to let out steam? To feel in control? Is it a morbid curiosity of what would happen if you chose these options?
What games cater to your wants the best?
Lay it out here and perhaps I will be able to deepen my understanding.

Bold words for someone with an Edea avatar.

Edea did nothing wrong

Pretty sure everybody that tried to activly follow the story of Final Fantasy 8 started to get brain damage somewhere into cd3. Me included

... that said, I enjoyed FF8 quite a bit. Because of its unique quirky mechanics, not despite them.
The final dungeon is my favorite in the whole series, tied with FF6's.

I mean gameplay wise every fight seems to be best solved by spamming all your G.F. and even if you restrict yourself from it and use spells and limit breaks or whatever, there is just not much there...

And let us not talk about how fuckin dumb Squall is. 12 year old Emo boy trapped in the body of a grown man. He is also not the hero of the story. Everybody but him is. Everybody tells him what to do. They tend to him as the leader, but in reality nobody would, because he never has any answers or orders until the other fill in. What a horrible protag.

 

[UndeadHalfOrc]

Well, he does step up to the plate and take charge during the Disc 2 climax.
And he does decide to go to Esthar right after that.
But yeah, that doesn't last.

 

[DemonKing]

My workplace is a matriarchy where women must be believed, all genders identities are welcomed (save CIS males) and no matter what dumb thing a person of colour says it's treated as holy text.

In short, I see evil every day so playing it in a game is no big deal.

 

[Zed Duke of Banville]

What is the appeal of playing as “evil”?​

Hentus Needs Pants
East of Gnisis's Silt Strider you'll find Hentus Yansurnummu standing in the water. It appears that Hainab Lasamsi has stolen his pants while he was bathing and he wants you to retrieve them.
Get Them Back in the Name of Decency
Hainab does have the pants. You can find him wandering around town, usually around the temple. You can retrieve the pants from him any number of ways: kill him, knock him out, steal them, or raise his disposition to 80 and talk him into giving them to you. Return the pants to Hentus for some hackle-lo.

• Greetings:
  • "Hainab stole my pants!"
• pants:
  • "I was taking a bath and Hainab Lasamsi stole my pants. Maybe you could talk to him and get my pants back."
  • "Those aren't my pants. Hainab Lasamsi has my pants." (if you have a pair of common pants in your inventory)
  • "You got my pants back? I wish I could stand up to Hainab like you did."
    • Give him the pants.: [3 Hackle-Lo Leaf added to your inventory; 1 Hentus Pants removed from your inventory] "I don't have much to give you, but I have some hackle-lo. Here, take it. Thanks for getting my pants back."
    • Keep his pants.: "You too? What did I ever do to you?"

 

[dukeofwoodberry]

RPGs almost never put any consequences behind being the most altruistic person ever. You can always save everyone and usually get rewarded with the best loot also. There's no sacrifice involved in being the ultra goody two shoes.

I think there should be sacrifice in the form of more challenging gameplay. Make the player earn the most desired outcomes. This may apply both to Good and Evil playstyles, by the way.

Would if being that super good character meant you lost an attribute point for a story related reason or a popular companion died due to you being overly altruistic. Now we're actually challenging the player: are you sure you're willing to make real sacrifices to be altruistic?

Playing games is about winning, finding solutions, overcoming gameplay challenges. The above paltry rewards are an insult to a real gamer, and should only be reserved for mediocre storyfags; those that are not willing to work for the best and hardest outcome. Witcher 3's Cronie plot is an example of how not to do it: all the outcomes are bad no matter how skilled the player is. I even recall there was a trick (exploit?) related to the trapped spirit under the tree, that the devs could have let a skilled player use to get a win-win outcome, but I guess CDPR doesn't make games for gamers.

Yep I'm a story fag. I don't believe everything should have a win-win outcome just because you play well. Sometimes there isn't a perfect solution despite you doing things right. Having to make difficult choices is engaging for the player instead of the usual slop we get where the player can almost always save everyone, get all the best gear, ect... Game devs are afraid to upset players who are used to doing the good/altruistic path and make no real sacrifices for doing so

 

[HumanMech]

It's the only choice for modern RPGs. Even then, they are barely tolerable.

 

[babayaga]

While browsing the internets for opinions and reflections on rpgs I came across few but very vocal “evil players” that worship their evil waifus and derive this immense gratification out of their paths. I always found it silly or nonsensical but now it makes me wonder, why?

For clarification, I am a proud lawful good enjoyer. I pick a paladin, almost always prioritize the wellbeing of game characters and punish evildoers and lawbreakers.
Therefore it is difficult for me to grasp why one would choose an evil path to hurt others, corrupt innocent and just in general fuck with and destroy everything.
The idea of negatively affecting/hurting anyone, even my enemy does not bring me joy or pleasure.

I develop small games and my dream is to make my own rpg. For that reason I'd like to make sense of the other side. It is essential to grasp the full picture to create a truly engaging piece of media rather than just forcing people to play like my autistically righteous self.

Thus I ask, what is the appeal of playing an evil path? What do you get out of it? What makes it interesting? What sort of feeling are you pursuing?
Is it to let out steam? To feel in control? Is it a morbid curiosity of what would happen if you chose these options?
What games cater to your wants the best?
Lay it out here and perhaps I will be able to deepen my understanding.

Bold words for someone with an Edea avatar.

What can I say, her design is just fantastic.

 

[Vagabond Merchant]

While browsing the internets for opinions and reflections on rpgs I came across few but very vocal “evil players” that worship their evil waifus and derive this immense gratification out of their paths. I always found it silly or nonsensical but now it makes me wonder, why?

For clarification, I am a proud lawful good enjoyer. I pick a paladin, almost always prioritize the wellbeing of game characters and punish evildoers and lawbreakers.
Therefore it is difficult for me to grasp why one would choose an evil path to hurt others, corrupt innocent and just in general fuck with and destroy everything.
The idea of negatively affecting/hurting anyone, even my enemy does not bring me joy or pleasure.

I develop small games and my dream is to make my own rpg. For that reason I'd like to make sense of the other side. It is essential to grasp the full picture to create a truly engaging piece of media rather than just forcing people to play like my autistically righteous self.

Thus I ask, what is the appeal of playing an evil path? What do you get out of it? What makes it interesting? What sort of feeling are you pursuing?
Is it to let out steam? To feel in control? Is it a morbid curiosity of what would happen if you chose these options?
What games cater to your wants the best?
Lay it out here and perhaps I will be able to deepen my understanding.

Bold words for someone with an Edea avatar.

Edea did nothing wrong

Pretty sure everybody that tried to activly follow the story of Final Fantasy 8 started to get brain damage somewhere into cd3. Me included

... that said, I enjoyed FF8 quite a bit. Because of its unique quirky mechanics, not despite them.
The final dungeon is my favorite in the whole series, tied with FF6's.

I mean gameplay wise every fight seems to be best solved by spamming all your G.F. and even if you restrict yourself from it and use spells and limit breaks or whatever, there is just not much there...

And let us not talk about how fuckin dumb Squall is. 12 year old Emo boy trapped in the body of a grown man. He is also not the hero of the story. Everybody but him is. Everybody tells him what to do. They tend to him as the leader, but in reality nobody would, because he never has any answers or orders until the other fill in. What a horrible protag.

Have you played the game? G.F. are pretty mediocre except for some specific cases and you mainly want them for their junction and out of combat abilities. Magic + limit breaks are way stronger.
The thing about Squall is that he is a sperg and has childhood issues, yet he is the most competent out of all the retards in Balamb at the time (just look at Quistis), and a big part of his story is about accepting your fate and growing up, stop being a child, and step up to responsability, which he eventually does with a bit of help.

 

[babayaga]

RPGs almost never put any consequences behind being the most altruistic person ever. You can always save everyone and usually get rewarded with the best loot also. There's no sacrifice involved in being the ultra goody two shoes.

I think there should be sacrifice in the form of more challenging gameplay. Make the player earn the most desired outcomes. This may apply both to Good and Evil playstyles, by the way.

Would if being that super good character meant you lost an attribute point for a story related reason or a popular companion died due to you being overly altruistic. Now we're actually challenging the player: are you sure you're willing to make real sacrifices to be altruistic?

Playing games is about winning, finding solutions, overcoming gameplay challenges. The above paltry rewards are an insult to a real gamer, and should only be reserved for mediocre storyfags; those that are not willing to work for the best and hardest outcome. Witcher 3's Cronie plot is an example of how not to do it: all the outcomes are bad no matter how skilled the player is. I even recall there was a trick (exploit?) related to the trapped spirit under the tree, that the devs could have let a skilled player use to get a win-win outcome, but I guess CDPR doesn't make games for gamers.

Yep I'm a story fag. I don't believe everything should have a win-win outcome just because you play well. Sometimes there isn't a perfect solution despite you doing things right. Having to make difficult choices is engaging for the player instead of the usual slop we get where the player can almost always save everyone, get all the best gear, ect... Game devs are afraid to upset players who are used to doing the good/altruistic path and make no real sacrifices for doing so

I feel like it depends on the goal of the game. Some games will allow you to have a power fantasy in which you can do anything (Evil playthrough allows you to do anything with no consequences and good playthrough let's you save everyone.)
Then there are games that try to be more "realistic" in the sense that they punish you for missteps and there are no true perfect outcomes. It is impossible for a game to be both at once.
Not every game is made for every person. All players have different expectations and wants and it is simply impossible to cater to everyone.

I'm a story fag as well and I value good writing above everything. Good gameplay is fun for sure but what truly makes me love and remember a game is a good story and compelling characters.