There are a lot of interesting opinions here. I'll throw in my two credits worth: The "Grey Side", in the game, seems to be a fairly reasonable path. A "right tool for the right job" response to life that still allows for the occasional drift into Light 1 (arguably guys like Han or Lando) or Dark 1. It is fairly realistic, as such things go. However... While not as central as, say Lord of the Rings, "Star Wars" has a charming and endearing to some (and naive and annoying to others) tradition of moralistic exploration. The Light Side (as I see it) has a classic "keep a cool head and be excellent to each other" vibe (that Jedi dogma takes to the occasional moralistic extreme) and the Dark Side (as I see it) has a harsher "keep a fiery heart and the ends justify the means" (which the Sith take to tyranical extremes) vibe. But really, it's all just "The Force": the Universe and it's people in harmony experiencing the life cycle of their kind as appropriate. The oft-referenced "dark side" (or as I like to call it, to seperate it from the Dark Side game mechanic, "the down side") comes when an individual taps into that harmony (the Force) agendizes it. Essentially, deciding personally or galactically that their narrower vision is better ("I should rule" or "my wife must never die"). The seductive part becomes obvious as the truly powerful rarely come to these conclusions arbitrarily. They believe in their "certain point of view". The jedi agenda of non-agenda (but lots of moral judging) may have kept the order as a whole from the dark side in general, but insulated them to the point of aggressive passivity. Perhaps the dark side is so hard to see because they had lost touch with the "humanity" that the dark side manifests from. Now, all this is distinct from the jedi and sith faiths. Again just my opinion, but it could be argued that the means that these two faiths' approaches to the Force and it's down side may not be 100% indicitive of the Force itself. My basis for this comes primarily from the filmic fate of Luke Skywalker who proved that jedi dogma had long since lost much of it's compassion and love. He ran off half-cocked to save his friends and suffered a physical and emotional setback, to be sure. But he didn't let it break him. Contrary to jedi dogma he transcended the traditional downfalls and redeemed Darth-Freakin'-Vader. Luke knew love and passion, but still lived in harmony. In context of this game, I try to follow a similar example with either faction. As things are, now, commiting to Light or Dark points is worth my while. I accept that. As a result, I have chosen to give each character I play a "counter point". A peice of the opposing philosophy that... enhances (and slows down)... my journey to either lightness or darkness. A jedi who is a romantic or a sith warrior who gives failures a second chance to do better. They accept these "flaws", so to speak, as part of the path to greater attunement to their side of the Force. So, um, yeah... "Grey side" gear would be a good idea, but until then we have some cool options to make do.

Also, people are forgetting a whole other option: Don't complete the quest. Both options do not suit you? Then choose not to do either.

Says who? Or... Lies like "These aren't the droids you're looking for..."? Even so... My whole theory is that 10 Commandment style morality are jedi/sith concepts. Now, those moralities do a fine job of binding a force user to their aspect of the force, but may not bind the force itself. I lie that nurtures freedom trumps a truth that harms freedom. Again, in theory...

I think the idea of the designers is to make you think about your Light and dark choices rather than just go "goody goody" or "evil bastard". While George Lucas was always a bit hedge-y on the subject, there is some in the core canon from which one could infer that the light side, while nurturing, was not "good" and the dark side, while dangerous, was not "bad" but rather the Force Users themselves who placed moral judgments. More than once we see rigid Jedi dogma fail and the dark side provide fuel for the well-intended. Now, this is just MY opinion: The balance that was brought to the Force was manifested in Luke (as opposed to brought by him directly) when he fueled himself with his emotions, but did not let them consume him, stepping back when he needed to. To me, this is not balancing good and evil or even light and dark. There is only the Force, and to use the "dark side" is really just using it poorly (either by outright evil or just very bad judgement). It is with that in mind, that I can see how the story of the mates pans out as it does: Taking away the female's free will over a point of dogmatic morality ("thou shalt not lie", as it were) is the darker choice. Keeping a secret to protect her free will (and possibly her safety) is the lighter option. The game's approach to romance is similar, if you look at it that way. Yes, emotional attachments opens you up to the dark side... But you don't have to let it consume you. You can still be a light in the galaxy, if you choose to be. You just won't get the in-game light "score" as fast. Similar for the sith that want to go as dark as can be. Occasionally, what is most efficient for the Empire is mercy: quick deaths or allowing an assassin to live and work for you or killing a nasty cave monster. I sometimes will define a character I play in SWtOR as "light" or "dark" from the outset, but also define a "soft spot". A trait that may occasionally point to the other side. Like a sith warrior who might give someone a second chance to prove themselves or a jedi knight who fosters love behind his Masters' backs. Each can still be a force for their ideals, but now they are a little more complex and interesting. But again, just my opinion.

I think it is partially a cultural thing. Dark 1 for the Empire does not equal Dark 1 for the Republic (except in game mechanics). The way I see it, the sith live with a different baseline of darkness than the jedi. Just getting by in the Sith Empire gives you a few metaphorical darkside points or hardens you to it all... or both. Emotions, however, is where they seem to line up, at least functionally.

You can always hit ESC before the convo ends and try again

Aren't they all Imperial Agents? Disavowed, I guess.

He meant "another trilogy" which would turn all the canon slight off kilter.

While there is plenty canon (mostly EU) to call this theory into question, but here it is: All this philosophy about light and dark reminds me of the whole "Chosen One" prophecy and Luke's eventual struggle with staying focused on stoically his training and running off passionately to save his freinds and later raging against the Emperor and Vader, but drawing back into calm control. I wonder if George Lucas intended for Luke to be a manifestation of the balance Anniken was destined to bring: Love, passion, emotion without being "evil".

EU lore aside... Classic "Star Wars" depictions of the Light and Dark sides have been in context of a single culture... Or more specifically, a large government (Republic then Empire) and a dissenting internal faction (Seperatists then Rebel Alliance). However, in SWtOR, we have a Sith Empire and Jedi-backed Republic as differing concurrent entities. Birth to death for the average non-Force-using citizen in either group may not involve adherence to the Jedi or Sith codes, but they will be impacted by them in how their cultures have embraced (or been embraced) by their respective Force-user orders. To put it another way: In context of role play, a Jedi at Dark 1 and a Sith at Dark 1 need not be seen as moral equivilents due to the leanings of the culture they were raised in. Some examples: While it would be natural to see the crew of Serenity (of "Firefly") as the Smuggler class over in the Republic, let's look at them in context of the Sith Empire... When Mal and the gang are outside of Alliance control, they live in a cut-throat world of dangerous opprotunists. Mal, himself, is a pragmatic killer... When the situation calls for it. While his life would be easier if he put his morals aside, he is dedicated to a fair and honorable path dangerous crime ("If I ever kill you, you'll be awake. You'll be facing me, and you'll be armed"). In context of the Republic, Mal might lean Dark, in context of the Empire he might lean Light... For the exact same lifestyle.

I won't rehash what I agree with or belabour what I don't, but there is food for thought in this thread. One point worth adding is that, at least at this stage, the Sith path of the Dark Side has elements of state-sponsored religion (and much that that implies). As a result, every force-sensitive in the Empire will range from pragmatic lip-service to true-believer zealot (and all in between) and thus will use that culture of competition to justify their actions or will actually feel justified. Personally, I admire the core of jedi morals (as I perceive them) which seem to come to "live in the world as it should be to show the world what it can be". But, in context of this game, I am hooked on the sith's "spirit of aggressive competition"... Or the theory of it.

I have been seriously considering it, but never got around to testing it in beta. Good to know others seem to have had success.