>>54113276>less incentive to seek it outThe main problem these OH SO DEEP game devs have, is that many think nice = good, and dick = bad.
Doing morally ambigous choices have to have an impact. Most of the time is hippies vs nazies, and that's boring.
What if I'm a guy who does the bad choices because I'm a guy who shots first, questions second? Or I'm doing good things because I know I'll be close to an emperor when everything turns to peace?
What these game devs believe is moral choice, it should be politics: the fight of a good plan vs another good plan. I think there was an anime who exemplified this. Space Guardians? Can't remember the name.
As for game examples, one is obviously Fallout New Vegas, because every faction has pros and cons, so there's no proper "good" ending. Even when you go your own way, many tows were left to their own devices, so some suffered.
Another example is Tactics Ogre: Let's Cling Together. You can massacre an entire town to give you political leverage, but this locks you out of the best endings. In fact, your best scenario is living in a sensible peace treaty at best, with taxes every corner, and at worst you will be murdered the moment you take the crown.
And if you refuse, your army abandons you, and a new faction (yours) now has to take towns and small empires to get leverage. Basically a Civil War. The worst end is, again, being murdered, and the best shows the life of your friends and family at peace while your sister becomes the queen. You become in her army advisor.
