I have seen a lot of good and evil games along with plenty of people who played them but I haven't met one person who is the good guy. Everyone I know who played Bioshock will kill the little sisters, everyone I know playing Fable will always be the evilest bastard they can be, everyone I know playing Mass Effect will always turn Shepard into a dick and everyone I know who played Neverwinter Nights will inevitably choose some evil alliance. Even on the second play through people will just be evil again. This is of course just everyone I know, so I decided to reach out. Does anyone here play the good path?

I'm usually always good on my first play through but if a game is good enough for me to replay, I'll be the bad guy.

I prefer the Shin Megami Tensei Nocturne concept of different philosophy's over a shallow subjective polar Good/Evil system. I'd probably be good if I played such games, but I don't because the Good/Evil system is stupid. So it's a moot point.

i do both on the first play through i play good and then i realise "wait a minute all of these guys are dicks ah well i made a commitment to be good and i will" next time round i kill 'em all

I tend to play the good side first, as I just can't bring myself to be evil the first time round. Strangely, this conflicts with the first impressions I tend to make in the real world as I can be a downright cold-hearted, evil bastard to just about anyone. The evil side tends to be a refreshing change though as you are not constrained by society's laws and expectations.

More often, if the game allows for it, I try to play a straight down the middle neutral game as it is often the toughest way to play and balancing evil, good and fun is a challenge I enjoy.

I do all 3, the mother teresa, the middle ground, and the adolf hitler.

No particular order.

Being evil usualy benifits the player more.

I think as long as its not goody two shoes heroes then the good guys can be interesting, although saying that I almost always go bad guys the first time I play through a game.

Ha! The only game I've ever played "evil" in was Fable, mostly because as Yahtzee puts it, you're only choice is between Mother Theresa and Baby Eating. I also have a Hero Complex, but what kid who grew up in the 80's and 90's doesn't, I grew up wanting to be a "hero" not a "villain". I know there's WAY more to that now, and I appreciate games that throw in some nice moral grey, but if I must choose between "Comic Book Supervilliany" and "Saintly Goodness" well, I usually take Saintly Goodness. Now if a game offered say, a path of ruthless badassery (Mass Effect, only game where I've played both paths) I'd be more inclined.

I dislike the lack of a happy middle ground, where "neutral" isn't really a choice (if there's no Neutral Ending, then Neutrality is irrelevant).

I usually play good and if a game is fun enough I'll play again as an evil character. I tend to hate being yelled at by the other characters I'm supposed to trust with my life(virtual life). But if I hate them enough like in kotor 2, I'll restart and try my best to ruin their lives and eventually try too kill them(keywords "try too kill them"). I also get disappointed in games like Mass Effect where choosing a side doesn't really change the story much, so I just play those games on the good side.

Bored Tomatoe:
Being evil usualy benifits the player more.

You say that, but in the original KOTOR there was an entire scenario based on proving that wrong. Essentially, at one point you find out you will be paid if you do the evil thing. However, what you don't realise is that if you take the good option then you end up getting paid roughly twice as much. It was a nice touch of irony.

And don't forget you have to kill about half your team (albeit the annoying half).

most people play as the baddie cos you can be all extortionate and make people give you more money and stuff for quests. The only game I know of that has a persuasive good guy is mass effect.

i play the horde! although in most WoW servers its seems the alliance are dominating PvP arenas.
but apart from that its fun.

bwhahaha

You hang around with some sick people. In inFAMOUS, I'll be the purest guy it is possible to be.

Geo Da Sponge:

Bored Tomatoe:
Being evil usualy benifits the player more.

You say that, but in the original KOTOR there was an entire scenario based on proving that wrong. Essentially, at one point you find out you will be paid if you do the evil thing. However, what you don't realise is that if you take the good option then you end up getting paid roughly twice as much. It was a nice touch of irony.

And don't forget you have to kill about half your team (albeit the annoying half).

That's a "bait and switch" in most of the old RPG's like Baldurs Gate, choose the evil option asking for more money, get like 25% more, be good, get the money AND a magic item.

I played Bioshock good... I tried to replay it as a bad mofo but got bored about 3 levels into it.

I played Bioshock and saved Little Sisters on my first playthrough:

I almost always play the good guy (for at least the first completion anyway!) :]

I like playing games on bad side... Well, doesn't matter to me much why, it's just the way I prefer... But in most games, it's helluva lot easier to be on a good side, the developers make it more easy and stuff, so I think evil is more superior than good 'cause it's more complicated and their units in RTSs and the characters in RPGs look more... violent, stronger, but then again they look grumpy and stupid too (mostly, but that depends on whatever game you may play).

I always play a good guy in games. I've tried many times to play the evilest bastard ever but I cant. Might have something to do with me always playing a monk in MMO's.

Tapeworm:
I like playing games on bad side... Well, doesn't matter to me much why, it's just the way I prefer... But in most games, it's helluva lot easier to be on a good side, the developers make it more easy and stuff, so I think evil is more superior than good 'cause it's more complicated and their units in RTSs and the characters in RPGs look more... violent, stronger, but then again they look grumpy and stupid too (mostly, but that depends on whatever game you may play).

What game is it easier to be on the good side? In almost every rpg I've ever played the good side is the hard one. In Fable you just had to go around and kill people and in Bioshock you get less Adam by being nice to little girls.

In Mass Effect I played evil first cause Shepard is badass when you get to punch the news lady in the face. (lol) After that I went back and played the game over being good this time.

In Bioshock I just couldn't bring myself to kill little girls.

I normally try to take the approach I would in real life. Because I'm a nice guy, this means leaning towards the good (if somewhat selfish) side.

jvm23fool:
In Mass Effect I played evil first cause Shepard is badass when you get to punch the news lady in the face. (lol) After that I went back and played the game over being good this time.

In Bioshock I just couldn't bring myself to kill little girls.

In Bioshock killed a little sister once for kicks while my girlfriend was in the room... she almost made me sleep on the couch.

defcon 1:
I have seen a lot of good and evil games along with plenty of people who played them but I haven't met one person who is the good guy. Everyone I know who played Bioshock will kill the little sisters, everyone I know playing Fable will always be the evilest bastard they can be, everyone I know playing Mass Effect will always turn Shepard into a dick and everyone I know who played Neverwinter Nights will inevitably choose some evil alliance. Even on the second play through people will just be evil again. This is of course just everyone I know, so I decided to reach out. Does anyone here play the good path?

I'm usually always good on my first play through but if a game is good enough for me to replay, I'll be the bad guy.

Ive played all those games and never intentionally gone the evil route - usuaully I end up with the good or more or less good ending - its important to ditinguish (as NWN and to a lesser degree mass effect did) between good/evil vs law/chaos - a lawful action (completing a task set to you by a superior) is not always a morally good one, and conrtarywise, a chaotic act may not fly the banner of evil (robin hood and and jedi after 19bby wherent what youd call sadistic in breaking the "law")

I usually tend to be good, but in a Neutral Good ends-justifies-the-means badassery kind of way. Most of the time.

I wanted to see what happened when you harvest a Little Sister, so I saved my game right before one and did the deed. I promptly loaded it up again and saved her instead, and never even considered harvesting ever again. Of course, the gifts Tanenbaum sends you more than makes up for the short-term loss in Adam, but even if they weren't there and players who wanted to spare the Little Sisters had to make it through the entire game with level 1 Electroshock and Covered In Bees I think I'd still struggle on because there's something about turning little girls inside out in exchange for power ups that just doesn't sit well with me.

In games like KOTOR where it's at least a little more ambiguous (by comparison to Bioshock, naturally) I always end up light siding it. Partly because of the way I was raised, I suppose (my parents have both done a lot of charity work in their time and it's rubbed off on me) but mostly it's because the Sith just look like schoolyard bullies with lightsabers, and while I hate their sort I don't quite hate them enough to end up becoming them when I get some power of my own. That said, unless it means dark side points I'm usually pretty keen to lead the charged conversations towards provocation followed by slicing them into thin strips rather than letting them slink off to commit more atrocities once I'm out of earshot. My Revan & Exile may be merciful, but they ain't stupid.

Mind you, I'm one of those halo-polishing boy scouts who's never played GTA because I'm uncomfortable playing a criminal, so maybe I'm too far biased to be worth listening to. I didn't have any qualms about powersliding into crowds of terrified shoppers in Carmageddon, though. Maybe it's because I was a teenager when I first played it.

-Nick

I answered both because I typically play through any game as the "good guy" or version first, typically I stay that way, though sometimes being the bad guy is just so much more fun..

though certainly there are games like WoW in which Horde seems the Dark Side, but either faction, Horde or Alliance, views the opposing faction as the bad guys.. so who is bad? Neither? Both?

I know why playing the bastard is more fun, and I know that it should be more fun, but... I dunno, I don't see the attraction. It just leaves a sick feeling in my stomach. I was honestly surprised when I handed the controller to my friend during a game of Crackdown and watched him go on a rampage. I always play the good guy in games, because it's just not fun otherwise.

Geo Da Sponge:

Bored Tomatoe:
Being evil usualy benifits the player more.

You say that, but in the original KOTOR there was an entire scenario based on proving that wrong. Essentially, at one point you find out you will be paid if you do the evil thing. However, what you don't realise is that if you take the good option then you end up getting paid roughly twice as much. It was a nice touch of irony.

And don't forget you have to kill about half your team (albeit the annoying half).

Yes I realize that, but I said usually, not always... and I hated that part of my team... a bunch of whiney bitches..

I always play evil first, but generally go back and play good the second time around. Then I play evil like 20 more times.

niether. I prefer games where the choices are more than just baby eater or flower child.

I usually run through a game twice; first time I play nice, second time I play evil.

Strangely enough, I have yet to see a game where choosing the "evil" options on a solid basis yielded any sort of significant difference in personal gain.

For example, something along of these lines happens sometimes in the campaigns of NWN2;

PC: now that I've saved your sorry arse, what do you have to tell me about the baddie?
NPC: blablaevilblablaplotblabla
---------
now, it can go these two ways

Good-
---------
PC(G): thank you, by the way, here is a little something to buy you safe passage far away from the baddies' vengeance.
NPC: thank you so very much, here, you can have this. I don't need it anymore! "leaves" *player character loses an insignificant amount of gold, player character gains an obscene amount of xp, player receives a powerful and maybe useful item worth the value of their negligible donation an infinite time over.
---------
Evil-
---------
PC(E) Thank you, now, gimme your stuff or I'll turn you over to the baddie.
NPC: Bastard! "leaves" *player receives a negligible amount of gold, player receives a quite ordinary amount of xp*

the same thing happens in bioshock, while one could argue that your actions are even more evil when there is nothing to gain by performing them, it bugs me to no end that an unending chain of selfish decisions end you up with less personal gain than selflessly sacrificing yourself to others.

I usually can't stand doing evil things in a game. It took a lot of willpower for me to kill the first little sister in bioshock in order to see the alternate ending. Not worth it. Even the game Overlord, where you're supposed to be evil, I ended up being the nicest evil ruler there ever was. I just don't find pleasure in doing evil things, even in a virtual scenario.

I like to experiment with both, but if I have a choice I usually choose to be evil, because it makes me feel like a badass, especially in the good WRPGs like KotOR and Neverwinter Nights.