for interpretation on the player’ s side; they either did something good, or something bad. The shortcomings of this system are perhaps most apparent in Fallout 3’ s ending. To reach the game’ s conclusion, the player is given a final binary choice: sacrifice yourself or walk away. Completely neglecting the player’ s actions up to that point, the story is reduced to a final choice. Following this choice is a brief cutscene in which the player’ s choices over the course of the game are weighed against each other. The narrator describes the nature of those choices as either good or bad depending on your overall karma level.
Fallout 3 is a shining example of what most games with choices lack: a fulfilling sense of morality. Consider Red Dead Redemption and its equally binary honor system, or Mass Effect’ s Paragon and Renegade scores. Regardless of the title, these“ morality meters” are all guilty of rendering morality into an unfeeling statistic that takes emphasis away from consequence— what truly gives moral weight to a choice. Recently, titles such as Telltale Game’ s The Walking Dead and Dontnod Entertainment’ s Life is Strange have tried to emphasize morality by employing dynamic stories that, in theory, are meant to adapt according to each choice the player makes. Yet in practice, these games succumb to many of the aforementioned flaws explored in Fallout 3. Both The Walking Dead and Life is Strange culminate with the player making a difficult binary choice that disregards any and all prior choices made by the player, resulting in a lack of narrative fulfillment.
It’ s not just these few games, though. Video games in general aren’ t well-equipped to convey a strong sense of morality. Unlike film and television creators, video games developers do not have full, unadulterated control over the entertainment experience. Video games have the added element of the player, who can manipulate a game world in unpredictable ways. This often results in narratives and choices painted in broad, uncompelling strokes. Considering the inherent element of interactivity, perhaps it is impossible for games to achieve a strong sense of morality. Though if any title has come close, it is undoubtedly Toby Fox’ s Undertale.
Undertale succeeds in establishing a strong moral texture by giving every encounter narrative and moral weight. Each battle with a monster in the game offers the player a choice: show mercy or attack( and kill). While this might sound identical to the the binary choices presented in Fallout 3, it is anything but. Showing mercy is never established outright as a“ good” choice, nor does killing the game’ s monsters feel unequivocally“ evil.” Both approaches pose difficulties for the player, as the game tests their capacity for violence. Where Undertale truly shines is in attributing meaningful consequences to whatever route the the player takes; every encounter impacts the game world. Even killing a seemingly insignificant Froggit of Ice Cap will alter how future interactions play out. Whereas Fallout 3’ s karma system seems to be a mechanic predominantly removed from narrative, Undertale’ s choices are directly linked to the game’ s
( Continued)
“ Regardless of the title, these“ morality meters” are all guilty of rendering morality into an unfeeling statistic that takes emphasis away from consequence— what truly gives moral weight to a choice.”