this post was submitted on 10 Dec 2025
4 points (100.0% liked)
Games
21273 readers
179 users here now
Tabletop, DnD, board games, and minecraft. Also Animal Crossing.
Rules
- No racism, sexism, ableism, homophobia, or transphobia. Don't care if it's ironic don't post comments or content like that here.
- Mark spoilers
- No bad mouthing sonic games here :no-copyright:
- No gamers allowed :soviet-huff:
- No squabbling or petty arguments here. Remember to disengage and respect others choice to do so when an argument gets too much
- Anti-Edelgard von Hresvelg trolling will result in an immediate ban from c/games and submitted to the site administrators for review. :silly-liberator:
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
I find it a bit weird that this video takes the position that players overwhelming taking good options is A) a problem B) which should be solved by making the evil options more tempting.
it could be an indication that the choices aren't interesting enough and that's a writing problem at least.
why bother making both if nobody is going to play them?
I think the idea of a morality system where the evil option gives you more stuff, but the good option actively helps people more would work better. People don't actually do evil IRL for the lulz.
But gamers love to min/max and optimize, so if the evil option is more "efficient" then people will just pick that and the idea of evil being tempting would just fall flat.