Yeah, it definitely felt like Bethesda was avoiding the more controversial stuff from the previous games in Fallout 3. While I usually end up playing some goody two-shoes character I like it to be by choice and not because someone was to chicken to put the options in the game.I hope they deal with more plausible evil shit than they have been. Religion, racism, slavery, and sexism should be hardcore in this environment.
But if I remember correctly the PC was never really involved. If you look back to FO2 these things impacted the PC more directly. You could side with the slavers and you could even sell your companions as slaves. Or you could take down the organization. Your choice. Short on caps? Go out and kill stuff or make some money from selling drugs or prostitution.Religion was in FO3, was even a small story in a patch (or was it in a DLC?), mostly a nod to the Mushroom Cloud Church in Wasteland tho. Slavery was in both FO3 (kids in Paradise Falls?) and the DLC "The Pit", and neither story was very "light". Racism is in the form of the "normals" vs the ghouls, hell even Galaxy Radio goes on about the racism and slavers.
FTFYI'd prefer it if they did it like Witcher: "In the process of doing "good", you fucked every woman you came across"
As long as my pockets are full of caps and my backpack full of ammo. Good, Bad, I'm the guy with the 50 Cal Sniper Rifle.I never liked 'damned if you do, damned if you don't' character choices. Surprising bad outcomes from well intentioned decisions are realistic but they are still annoying and make you not care about the world. Maybe it's just the lawful good in me but I like to enter in a world of shit and travesty and leave it a paradise.
Frankly I think "moral" choices are stupid in most games and I'm not a huge fan of any kind of meter for it. Especially in Fallout. There should just be choices that you make or you don't make and it's up to you to determine whether or not you feel there's a morality behind any of them. I think that your actions should haveconsequences, but the game shouldn't have a "good" or "evil" thing behind them.These awkward convoluted choices in quests never resonated with me. The best moral choices were more subtle and driven by player desire, greed and ambition. Most quest-based moral choices involve choosing a personality for a character (good/evil, typically) and then being offered a good or evil choice in a quest with basically similar rewards. When some guy asks you to blow up a nuclear weapon in megaton it becomes silly because the only reason a player would do that is because they know it's a game and they want to see some shit.
Fallout games work best when you're surviving and moral choices are much more relevant when you need to choose the evil path to survive. Helping a town fight off a horde of invading mutants isn't a good or evil choice, it's just the smart thing to do. But when you're out in the middle of the desert, are irradiated and thirsty and find an undefended hermit with supplies he won't give you the moral choice is clear and compelling.
Yeah, those are pretty much the most obnoxious things ever. Damned if you do, damned if you don't only comes off well if they really setup the situation before hand and it'sclearthat the situation is really bad/fucked up. Surprise Buttsecks is not cool.I never liked 'damned if you do, damned if you don't' character choices. Surprising bad outcomes from well intentioned decisions are realistic but they are still annoying and make you not care about the world. Maybe it's just the lawful good in me but I like to enter in a world of shit and travesty and leave it a paradise.