Being "Evil" In Games 

I suppose it depends on your interpretation and the game in question. I think it's safe to say that most people equate 'evil' runs in games to 'kill everything' runs. I think that gives us a pretty good idea as to how boring being 'evil' in a lot of games tend to be. Games usually tend to reward you for doing 'good' things and always tend to punish you for doing 'bad' things. But I think we all know that this is extremely 'video gamey'. It's never really that black & white which is why people tend to just equate 'kill everything' runs as the 'evil' run when it could be so much more nuanced than that. Not that there's inherently anything wrong with making a clear distinction. That could actually be a good thing depending on the game if, say, the point is to be a propaganda piece and/or the MC's alignment isn't meant to be challenged. Making clear distinctions between good and evil can be helpful in those regards. With that said, The most compelling games are usually the one's that blur the line like that and make no real distinction between--or are not judgmental about--the choices it gives you, leaving it up to player to decide whether or not they're being 'good' or 'evil'. This why, for all its faults, blowing up Megaton in fallout 3 is such a memorable event to players. Given the context can you TRULY say that blowing up Megaton was 'good' or 'evil'? Some people may think its evil, some may think it'll serve a greater good. At the end of the day, the player still gets paid for doing it, but the fact that there's no definitive answer is the point. New Vegas basically took the idea of Megaton and made it the whole game, lol. If I can do inhumane and despicable things in a game and STILL be rewarded for it and/or meet people that can sympathize/empathize or are indifferent with the foul shit I'm doing in the game's world in a way that feels believable, then the very idea of being definitively 'good' or 'evil' takes a backseat to the pure intrigue doing those things creates.

Modern Bethesda feels like they are chickening out of any depth of character stories or real grit for the most wide, plain white bread appeal.

I actually prefer New Vegas's companion locking for some choices, it gives the characters a more realistic depiction of a person. Like for an example when arcade pulls a gun on you for activating the Helos one weapon. To me it doesn't make sense that someone like piper would just go alone with the player going with the institute

Being evil in video games is killing an entire village for no reason in Minecraft. Good topic, MJ.

Sadly, most games relegate evil to "murderous madman." Like Fallout 3. Mass effect didn't let you be evil, just an asshole/selfish pragmatic. The best game for playing "evil" was Tyranny, where, ironically, you didn't have a choice. You had to be "evil", but you decided what kind of evil you were. Apathetic enforcer? Elitist slaver? Anarchist? Murdering psycho? It was up to you.

Oh surprises me, the game where being evil is called "RENEGADE" its not actual evil but being a ruthless war hero, also being a renegade its not only not evil, is not even being a jerk is like the name says being a RENEGADE, getting solutions by jumping hoops or accepting the suffering of some for the good of everyone, best reflected on ME2 and 3.

Pathfinder: Wrath of the Righteous is, far as I'm concerned, the standard for allowing you to be evil in an RPG. Multiple paths for good, for neutral, and for evil. How evil do you want to be? Do you want to just be a psychotic dick? Do you want to aim for the throne of hell? How about becoming the hivemind of a sentient swarm or insects and devouring all of life and creation? How about becoming the apex of undeath and forming an undead empire that will subjugate the world? Every single choice of which radically alters the way the game plays out in the same way the good and neutral options do.

I wish more games allowed you to just be deceitful and conniving. Most games' "evil" playthroughs consist of just killing everything and being a monster. It's more satisfying to be evil when nobody truly knows you're evil until it's too late.

Manhunt and hatred was such a dark tone.

Infamous is another series that seemed a bit shallow with its evil choices.

For me i only play evil if the evil story is good a which it rarely is so good is the only option because its always treated as cannon

played as an evil dude in fable, did some weird stuff, I dont wanna address, but yeah it was fun.

Yeah man and in Fallout 3 you can use the mesmetron to do even more f-up stuff, I remember reading people complaining about the Nuka World dlc because you can't be a morally good character if you want to complete the dlc.

Undertale?

I feel like metro has a more unintentional evil to it. The "evil" bad ending is just artyom doing what he thought at the time was right as for the good ending, it's just the same but he actually listens to what someone has asked of him or he spares a surrendering soldier. Outer worlds too has alot of evil choices in it and it was refreshing to actually have the chance to just be a horrible character to the point where your companions can actually leave if they think you're fucked in the head which honestly is funny. What's clever is that all these games that implement a morality mechanic make the player naturally choose a good path. Fallout and the fable games are another one as an example where they literally have a reputation system where helping grants rewards and killing will get bounties put on your head and you literally become "kill on sight"

The whole idea about Mass Effect was basically this. More than being Evil the idea for a renegade was more of the kind of way to deal with a crimina you're still the good guy afterall. The whole idea at least during the first game was between a by the book space cop or a trigger happy dirty harry style space cop. But during the sequels is just Space Jesus or Space asshole.

I have never since early nineties purchased a sports game due to simply being able to go outside and perform the activities,i play games that when performed in reality would be taboo. prohibited

I don't think being able to kill anyone is an rpg choice I care about too much. Why do that instead of limiting the player on who they can kill, and with those npcs, give the player choices that more players will interact with?

I've gotta disagree with you about the Brotherhood of Steel being evil, I'd say the Brotherhood is complicated but they don't really necessarily fit being good or evil.

The only two games that I know of that let me be truly be evil is fallout new Vegas and Kotor 2 you can literally be the phrase some men just want the world to burn

Prototype 1 and 2 were pretty good and infamous too

You need to know the distinction. While you being an evil murder hobo in Fallout New Vegas works for that game, it doesn't work for Mass Effect which is trying to tell a more cinematic and believable story with a character whom is heroic, they just aren't always nice.

I like to do multiple playthroughs evil good, ect. The funnest i ever had in fallout new vegas was PURE fucking evil, i'm talking the peak of evil lmao full evil, canibal, pure melee joined Cesar's legion

Let me be the evil bastard honestly

Have you ever played red dead redemption or Baldurs gate? They both allow and even goad you into being an evil person, I feel like you just haven’t played enough games my G I’m plenty evil in the games I play 😂😂😂😂😂

I like how this guy doesn't even mention Nuca-World DLC lol

Fallout universe, who hasn't roleplayed a psychopathic mass murderer who double and triple crosses anyone they can haha

I'm pretty evil in rdr2 lol

No.

Most games allow you to be bad not evil. Since bad is just ends up isolated then it never really comes up or you're really punished for it. EVIL is when you do something and even the bad people want to fight you.