Going Rogue's moral compass vs SW:OR

So we've heard tons of fans talking bout how the current issue, and the upcomming expansion are meant to keep the game competitive against those other two Superhero MMOs that are coming out... but I'm wondering about the Moral Compass and it's potential to try and make this game compete with Bioware's upcomming Star Wars: Old Republic.

While the idea of a shifting alignment system is certainly not unique it is a trademark fo Bioware games... and also of Stars Wars RPGs... and is said to play a big role in SW:OR, where Sith won't always be bad and Republic won't always be good.

So, who thinks that the Devs had SW:OR in their minds a bit when they decided to give us a moral compass?

I know the "let me switch sides" thing has been asked for a long time... but they could have simply had a defection story-arc/strike force and instead they gave us this moral compass thing.

I think a moral compass is something that's been a long time coming. It was inevitable, given CoH's source of inspiration (superhero comics), that we'd see this option added. I don't think SW:OR has anything to do with it.

[ QUOTE ]
So, who thinks that the Devs had SW:OR in their minds a bit when they decided to give us a moral compass?

[/ QUOTE ]
Actually i don't think that, at all, nope, not in the least bit.
SW:TOR is not competition to CoX because it's not in the same genre. Ok, their both sci-fi, but we are supers here, not jedi, completely different.

Moral compass for this game has been planned(i'm guessing) since probably not to long after CoV launched, they just pushed themselves to try and release it around when it was most marketable.

Another thing worth noting is that SW:OR is also based on an entirely different business model (microtransactions).

[ QUOTE ]
I think a moral compass is something that's been a long time coming. It was inevitable, given CoH's source of inspiration (superhero comics), that we'd see this option added. I don't think SW:OR has anything to do with it.

[/ QUOTE ]
Taking a different tack on the 'long time coming' idea, branching dialogue trees have been a functional reality in the game since the release of Issue 12. The different reactions of contacts to aspects of your character (origin) in the origin of power arc and different answers to get into the Midnighter Club were stated to be "test beds" for the system during Beta.

Since then we haven't seen it used extensively; nor is it part of AE. Yet i12 was released May 20th 2008. They've had a year behind the scenes to play with the working tech.

I'd say it's highly likely branching dialogue and a spectrum of Contact responses has been woven into the fabric of Going Rogue.

[ QUOTE ]
Another thing worth noting is that SW:OR is also based on an entirely different business model (microtransactions).

[/ QUOTE ]

Could I see a link to that? I hadn't heard that, but I'm very curious, since I've been hoping quietly that SW:OR will be a good game. Microtransactions seems to make that... less likely.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Another thing worth noting is that SW:OR is also based on an entirely different business model (microtransactions).

[/ QUOTE ]

Could I see a link to that? I hadn't heard that, but I'm very curious, since I've been hoping quietly that SW:OR will be a good game. Microtransactions seems to make that... less likely.

[/ QUOTE ]

It's a misquote of an exec running his mouth during an interview... AFAIK there's not been anything official about how the game will run.

Not SW:OR but the older KOTOR games had such a system, and it's quite likely that some of the devs played them and were familiar with the concept.

I am not sure how the old Ultima games used to work but I believe some of them had a similar concept too.

In other words, you never create, at best, you (re)create...

I hardly see the "moral compass" mechanic as something unique to BioWare, as Karma mechanics of various types have existed for years and years and years. While I don't remember if it had an exact numeric measurement, the original Fallout had a very strong dependence on "reputation" with the various cities.

That said, one would hope that whatever Karma mechanic NCNC... Paragon Studios pick, it won't be as... Petty as most of these have been. Most of the time these systems allow a good guy to be good in a generally consistent manner: have principles, do good, don't give into evil. Evil characters, however, aren't so much evil as schizophrenic or compulsive or, more commonly, just plain idiots. Evil on your typical Karma meter is achieved by being a jerk as often as possible, assuming that a character who says mean things and kicks puppies a thousand times is as bad as someone who, say, imposes genocide on an entire species. Evil tends to mean more "jerk" than... Well, "evil."

One can hope that whatever Karma mechanic they come up with will put as much value on ideological good and evil as it will on common acts of benevolence or cruelty, and would also differentiate between malice and evil vision.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Arcanaville Samuel_Tow is the only poster that makes me want to punch him in the head more often when I'm agreeing with him than when I'm disagreeing with him.

[ QUOTE ]
Another thing worth noting is that SW:OR is also based on an entirely different business model (microtransactions).

[/ QUOTE ]

Where did you hear that? I'm pretty sure it's going to be a $14.95 a month MMO.

[ QUOTE ]
One can hope that whatever Karma mechanic they come up with will put as much value on ideological good and evil as it will on common acts of benevolence or cruelty, and would also differentiate between malice and evil vision.

[/ QUOTE ]
From the way they're making it sound, the alignment system sounds like it will be based off of certain missions. That sounds to me like it's not going to be like some games where if you kill a guy you get evil points, but if you let him live, you get good points, repeat ad nauseum. My wild speculation is that Praetorian Earth is going to essentially be a huge co-op area, and anyone can do any mission. Doing "evil" missions turns your alignment towards evil, and doing "good" missions will turn your alignment towards good.

My major hope is that they don't make the same mistake that most games make, where the choices are always between being Jesus and being Charles Manson. I'm hoping that there's a gray area with some real moral dilemmas to choose between.

Might I take this moment to point out Dungeons & Dragons? Good/Evil-Lawful/Chaotic. A system invented years before computer games were sophisticated enough to include those kinds of scales.

The fact that CoX is adopting a moral compass is simply a natural progression of the game based on the world setting. I highly doubt it's any kind of kneejerk reaction to the new Star Wars MMO having a similar thing. After all, as others have mentioned, it's not a last minute idea; it's likely they've been moulding the game for it for several issues and had been planning it long before we even saw any changes ourselves.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
One can hope that whatever Karma mechanic they come up with will put as much value on ideological good and evil as it will on common acts of benevolence or cruelty, and would also differentiate between malice and evil vision.

[/ QUOTE ]
From the way they're making it sound, the alignment system sounds like it will be based off of certain missions. That sounds to me like it's not going to be like some games where if you kill a guy you get evil points, but if you let him live, you get good points, repeat ad nauseum. My wild speculation is that Praetorian Earth is going to essentially be a huge co-op area, and anyone can do any mission. Doing "evil" missions turns your alignment towards evil, and doing "good" missions will turn your alignment towards good.

My major hope is that they don't make the same mistake that most games make, where the choices are always between being Jesus and being Charles Manson. I'm hoping that there's a gray area with some real moral dilemmas to choose between.

[/ QUOTE ]

My guess for the system will be given options to what type of mission you do.

I also don't see why CoH & CoV won't have the same moral compass. The only difference being, if you do CoH missions, you know you're going towards good, CoV missions, you know you're going towards evil, CoR missions provide that grey area...both good, evil, and possibly in the middle.

[ QUOTE ]
I hardly see the "moral compass" mechanic as something unique to BioWare, as Karma mechanics of various types have existed for years and years and years. While I don't remember if it had an exact numeric measurement, the original Fallout had a very strong dependence on "reputation" with the various cities.


[/ QUOTE ]

I never said it was... I said it was hardly a new idea, I've deffinitly played many different games with a similar system. Even the Sakura Wars games from 2 on had a shall we say "serious-ness" bar that dictated if your character was laid back or a strict military hardass.

What I did say, is that it's a trademark of Bioware not in a litteral sense, but in the sense that they obviously love this feature and use it in all of their games including their upcomming MMO.

[ QUOTE ]
Might I take this moment to point out Dungeons & Dragons? Good/Evil-Lawful/Chaotic. A system invented years before computer games were sophisticated enough to include those kinds of scales.

The fact that CoX is adopting a moral compass is simply a natural progression of the game based on the world setting. I highly doubt it's any kind of kneejerk reaction to the new Star Wars MMO having a similar thing. After all, as others have mentioned, it's not a last minute idea; it's likely they've been moulding the game for it for several issues and had been planning it long before we even saw any changes ourselves.

[/ QUOTE ]

This board could really use a multquote function... (yeah I know I could do it manually).

Anyway, I agree that it was inevitable for the side swapping to happen, but it didn't have to be executed in this way...

Secondly, Alignment changes were never too common in pen and paper RPGs, they did happen but not all that much, except for the two star wars RPGs which relied on a dark side points system.

Thirdly for those that say the Star Wars MMO is not competition, I think it still is... there's only so many MMOs people can afford to, or have the time to play. A lot of comic book fans are also Star Wars fans, and there are also some players who just look for fun MMOs and don't care about the setting. (I know a lot of people who don't know the Warhammer miniatures game from lego men but still lover Warhammer Online). So while is not going to be 100% crossover, it will dip somewhat into the same pool.

Last thought... CoH in setting and the feel of the major NPCs always seemed a lot more like DC then Marvel to me... DC doesn't have nearly as much sideswapping as Marvel does.

Sure you got Hal Jordan becoming Paralax, or Hawk going crazy... you get the occasional conversion but Marvel deals a lot moe with moral relativism where DC usually only tackles that during special events, and tries to keep a grander, cleaner and more mythological image. Not to say it isn't there, and you've got heroes who the media turns against them (Supergirl) just like in Marvel... but the lines are more clear cut I've found. You got you're Supermans and Batmans and you've got your Jokers, Darksieds and Lex Luthors.

I don't know if it's the source material that made it inevitable or the player's perception of what a superhero MMO should be, but side swapping was inevitable even if the moral compass wasn't.

From a feel perspective, DC always felt more powered than Marvel.

But you're right. Just look at CoH. People who aren't comicbook/superhero fans play the game, just because they like the costumization/speed/fun of the game (saddly, it's that fact that ruins the comicbook/superhero feel to the game as well >.&gt.

However, the game will still have the superman & lex luthors of the game. Those who stay to one path strictly.

Though it'll mostly be those who actually play for concept, than those who just play to get everything/go the route for whatever has the most potential to make them the most powerful.

[ QUOTE ]
So, who thinks that the Devs had SW:OR in their minds a bit when they decided to give us a moral compass?

[/ QUOTE ]
Really? You asked if CoH is stealing stuff from a game that isn't even out yet? Wow, that's pretty awesome. I didn't know that the CoH staff had stolen this idea three years ago when they first announced it.

Oh yeah, this was originally planned back when CoV started, I have villains that are ready to become Heroes and Heroes that are ready to become Villains and have since CoV opened. They are all L50 and have rather good gear. Now I just have to return to the game.

[ QUOTE ]
Might I take this moment to point out Dungeons & Dragons? Good/Evil-Lawful/Chaotic. A system invented years before computer games were sophisticated enough to include those kinds of scales.

[/ QUOTE ]

And a system that, sadly, they did away with in the latest iteration of the game.
Now you can only be lawful good, neutral or chaotic evil...

Anyway; yeah, there is only so much way that you can express 'morality' on a mathematical scale.
Ideally, the game would present us with more than two options, including ones taking our motivation into account:
-Yes I am freeing the hostage governor (and he will be within my debt)
-No, I am not giving this dude any money (because I can think of much more deserving charities)
And such...

[ QUOTE ]
And a system that, sadly, they did away with in the latest iteration of the game.
Now you can only be lawful good, neutral or chaotic evil...

[/ QUOTE ]

4th Ed is a bastardization of the game designed to make the MMOG players more interested in it. It's faster and supposedly easier. I want my 3.5 ED and I'm dang happy.

Hell, I'll even open out my blue book from time to time to roll a REAL D&D game.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
And a system that, sadly, they did away with in the latest iteration of the game.
Now you can only be lawful good, neutral or chaotic evil...

[/ QUOTE ]

4th Ed is a bastardization of the game designed to make the MMOG players more interested in it. It's faster and supposedly easier. I want my 3.5 ED and I'm dang happy.

Hell, I'll even open out my blue book from time to time to roll a REAL D&D game.

[/ QUOTE ]
The whole alignment boondoggle can be easily handwaved. Hardly anything in 4E relies on alignment anyhow. Frankly, I'm having a lot of fun with 4E. The classes are more defined, and none of them are a bad option, unlike in 3.5 edition. The combat is a lot smoother, with a lot less confusing rules.

Frankly, the game plays a lot closer to first edition than 3.5 does, if we're talking about REAL DnD.

This threadjack is officially ON.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
So, who thinks that the Devs had SW:OR in their minds a bit when they decided to give us a moral compass?

[/ QUOTE ]
Really? You asked if CoH is stealing stuff from a game that isn't even out yet? Wow, that's pretty awesome. I didn't know that the CoH staff had stolen this idea three years ago when they first announced it.

Oh yeah, this was originally planned back when CoV started, I have villains that are ready to become Heroes and Heroes that are ready to become Villains and have since CoV opened. They are all L50 and have rather good gear. Now I just have to return to the game.

[/ QUOTE ]


Once again no... I'm not saying they're stealing it again it's not like Bioware is the only company that ever does it... and again there are other ways to do a defection between a hero and villain (it could have been a special task force or story arc)... and no they didn't announce a moral compass three years ago...

I never said they stole it, I never said it's the exclusive providence of bioware... please don't put words in my mouth.

All I was wondering is if the timing and exectution are meant to attract people who are looking foward to a similar feature in SW:OR

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
And a system that, sadly, they did away with in the latest iteration of the game.
Now you can only be lawful good, neutral or chaotic evil...

[/ QUOTE ]

4th Ed is a bastardization of the game designed to make the MMOG players more interested in it. It's faster and supposedly easier. I want my 3.5 ED and I'm dang happy.

Hell, I'll even open out my blue book from time to time to roll a REAL D&D game.

[/ QUOTE ]
The whole alignment boondoggle can be easily handwaved. Hardly anything in 4E relies on alignment anyhow. Frankly, I'm having a lot of fun with 4E. The classes are more defined, and none of them are a bad option, unlike in 3.5 edition. The combat is a lot smoother, with a lot less confusing rules.

Frankly, the game plays a lot closer to first edition than 3.5 does, if we're talking about REAL DnD.

This threadjack is officially ON.

[/ QUOTE ]


I like 4th Ed quite a bit.
I don't know if it is better than 3.5, but it is not worst.

I particularly like how they did away with Vancian magic, personally. Being a magic user meant you could only attack a handful of time and be out of attacks or (at higher levels) have to rely on essentially useless lower level ones.
The game is also, I think, easier to teach and get new players hooked with. I will test that in a few month when I am to GM for my brother and his girl-friend, both D&D newbies.

But, really, I don't like the change to the alignment system.
Not that I was using it anyway even in 3.5. But still. That annoys me.

The alignment changes is pretty much universally hated by long time DnD players, as it was rather stupid and pointless. My point is that while it's totally idiotic, you can just do a handwave and keep the original 9 alignments.

Definitively.
There are also, a lot of people in 3.5 and before that did not give much care into their alignment. They knew what their character was like and did not really need the somewhat constrictive double descriptor.

It just make me a bit queezy philosophically, the implication that you can not be good without being law abiding or that you can not be evil if you follow rules.




Anyway, we kinda derailled the thread...

The moral compass is a feature of the Fable games and a number of the BioWare games dating back to KOTOR (and maybe even before that).