I get what you are saying. It would be nice if the faction based items were more based around looks instead of stats as well.

There are a few times that I did want to choose the light side option, but didn't cause I'm wanting to max my dark side quicker.

Does anyone else think this was a bad idea? .

Not at all

This teaches that choice has consequence, and it's a good thing.

From time to time , I'll vary from the standard, but for the most part, I'm right along the path.

Alignment based EQ was an awesome idea.

Not at all

This teaches that choice has consequence, and it's a good thing.

From time to time , I'll vary from the standard, but for the most part, I'm right along the path.

Alignment based EQ was an awesome idea.

I agree that choices should have consequence, but the fact that alignment is tied to some loot means that it becomes less of a choice and becomes more of a decision. From a logical point of view, once you are on a certain alignment path, the correct decision is to max out your alignment. It's barely a choice at all specifically because one is better than the other.

More about this distinction here:

As soon as you tie in story to a system grounded with numbers and min/maxing, then it becomes a series of decisions instead of choices.

More appropriate "consequences" would involve changes in your story down the line, because then the pros and cons of each choice becomes subjective instead of objective.

Does anyone else think this was a bad idea? It essentially forces people to max our their alignment instead of choosing interesting choices and roleplaying...it essentially screws over the people who want to make choices not based on one single alignment but on an actual personality.

Yeah, it's a bummer. My agent is an Imperial loyalist and that often comes out dark but also comes out light side as well. I'm fine with consequences for choices, but building a whole loot system around choosing one side actually deters you from choosing and makes you streamline one path.

It's easily fixable I think. Remove the negative number system and just have 1,000 dark side points qualify you for Dark Side I, and so on... instead of having light side points take away dark side progression (and vice versa). That way when choosing a light side option you aren't removing progression, just not gaining any.

From a logical point of view, once you are on a certain alignment path, the correct decision is to max out your alignment.

That's your opinion. That does not make it fact.

The fact is that choices in life affect outcomes. This is one of the most unique elements in this game. You don't ALWAYS have to stick to one path or another. Mix it up, you're given the choice to do so.

Yes, in some cases, you're rewarded for stepping over the line, but that is the beauty of the whole thing, CHOICE. There is no 'correct decision'. There is only the decision YOU make along your path. If that decision leads you to rewards, then awesome. If not, hey, so what?

Does anyone else think this was a bad idea? It essentially forces people to max our their alignment instead of choosing interesting choices and roleplaying...it essentially screws over the people who want to make choices not based on one single alignment but on an actual personality.

Why is it a bad idea? Characters seldomly are as one-dimensional as "evil," "good" or "neutral," and I don't think players should be punished for that.

... Those who are interested in role-playing, and story outcome should play what interests them. Bioware isn't forcing you to max out alignment to get that slightly better gear to be better than that one person in PvP. If you want to race to end game to **** in PvP, then maybe you won't care for role-playing and story. In that case, go for alignment. Besides, who said you had to make one character? Go make another one if you really want to see how the other outcome choice affects your gameplay experience.

The problem with your last suggestion is that classes have absolutely zero replay value. So say I want to play agent, I want to get good gear but I also quite enjoy the story and don't just want to be pidgeon-holed into either a baby-eating anti-christ or jesus incarnate. So I go through, choosing choices based on the personality I've given to my char and now I can't get any of the good alignment based loot. I'm certainly not gonna re-roll because why would I? I'd know every single thing that'd happen, every quest, every story element, there's not a shred of anything new on my second playthrough.

Personality, I don't mind alignment based items so long as they don't prevent me from enjoying myself. For a lot of alignment based stuff I've found you can get equally as good alternatives elsewhere. The only situation I've found that alignment restrictions are absolutely retarded is when it comes to color crystals. "Hurr durr the color red is evil so only darksiders and baby-killers can use it", yeah, screw that. Canon jedi used red lightsabers and besides, what about non-fs classes? But that's a rant for another topic.

BASICALLY what I'm trying to say is, while from a design standpoint it really was not the smartest decision for a story-based MMO, it doesn't effect much in the long run.

There are many items that are prevented from a given alignment as well. These items weather they are restricted from light or dark side are always usable by those gray neutral players.

The "gray side" rewards are an idea they have and you might see a 3rd system added with it's own unique rewards. However this has to be balanced against the existing light and dark side reward systems.

There are many items that are prevented from a given alignment as well. These items weather they are restricted from light or dark side are always usable by those gray neutral players.

 

The "gray side" rewards are an idea they have and you might see a 3rd system added with it's own unique rewards. However this has to be balanced against the existing light and dark side reward systems.

That's just a bad idea. Adding onto a broken system doesn't fix that system, it just makes it more broken. In no way is alignment based items a good idea, making a "neutral" alignment item still isn't a good idea just because it's neutral.

Like faction grinding, there'll be time to toy with your alignment later as the game is further developed.

If City of Heroes can let you "go Rogue" ... this game will certainly expand on alignment, choices and all sorts of interesting things to go with it as it too develops over time.

Meaning ... someday you just might have neutral gear ... as well as the ability to switch alignments (I can't see Bioware ignoring the playability of having a jedi "fall" or a sith be "redeemed") ...

It won't be next week, or next month, but the system's foundation is in place. This thing will grow.

Not at all

This teaches that choice has consequence, and it's a good thing.

From time to time , I'll vary from the standard, but for the most part, I'm right along the path.

Alignment based EQ was an awesome idea.

What? -_-

I would love to pick some "light" choices, but I've only picked "dark" choices since I realized that there was loot in the game that required a certain level of alignment.

Canon jedi used red lightsabers

[Citation Needed]

[Citation Needed]

Adi Gallia for one, she was a jedi councilor and used a red lightsaber. It's just a color, it means nothing beyond breaking the tradition. Which any jedi who didn't use blue, green, or yellow was breaking.

What? -_-

 

I would love to pick some "light" choices, but I've only picked "dark" choices since I realized that there was loot in the game that required a certain level of alignment.

That's your choice. You have plenty of opportunities to achieve that alignment, by all means

I agree that choices should have consequence, but the fact that alignment is tied to some loot means that it becomes less of a choice and becomes more of a decision. From a logical point of view, once you are on a certain alignment path, the correct decision is to max out your alignment. It's barely a choice at all specifically because one is better than the other.

 

More about this distinction here:

 

As soon as you tie in story to a system grounded with numbers and min/maxing, then it becomes a series of decisions instead of choices.

 

More appropriate "consequences" would involve changes in your story down the line, because then the pros and cons of each choice becomes subjective instead of objective.

About your OP, it does not FORCE you to go and max out. However, thanks for the video. Now I actually understand where you're coming from. However, my first post still stands. If you're interested in role-playing, then role-play it out. Last time I checked, role playing and enjoying story doesn't REQUIRE 50 more endurance from an end-game LS chestplate. Yeah, it's better in PvP, but then, you're focused on role playing now, aren't you? Not PvP/combat. If you are interested in PvP, then go (as I said in my other post, now I'm just reinforcing my views) and max out your alignment towards the best endgame gear. Sure, it's a matter of CHOICE, there, my friend. Story, or combat, the 2 of the 4 major "pillars" of MMOs. Just re-roll, make a new character, one to enjoy that story, the other to enjoy PvP combat/whatever else. Besides, you'll end up making more characters to continue to enjoy the story of other classes/choices you make throughout your game.

First char went total darkside...but my second is all light and that's mostly because I can buy upgrades at 1/10th the cost since almost no one chooses light side choices.

Well unless operation gear has alignment limitations, which it does not seem too...there really is no difference in the end. All items that have alignment restrictions has mirror versions.

But I guess main problem is for the people who go middle of the row, game forces you to be heavy light or dark to equip certain items. Again, FPs/Operation/crafted gear should solve that problem....

That's your choice. You have plenty of opportunities to achieve that alignment, by all means

Y'know, your view on choices really is quite strict, isn't it? Going by your reasoning, if I held a gun to your head and told you to either kill your family or I'd shoot you, is that a choice? Technically it is, you get to choose, but is it a choice you want to make?

While TECHNICALLY it is a choice, but when the game basically goes "either do things my way or enjoy being gimped in PvP", it really stops being a choice.

P.S. For those going "if you're looking for roleplay then do that, if you want pvp then do that". What about people who want to do both? I, for one, want to play my story as I see fit until I hit lvl 50 and then I want to pvp since that's endgame right there. Not everyone wants just one or the other, most people want both.

While TECHNICALLY it is a choice, but when the game basically goes "either do things my way or enjoy being gimped in PvP", it really stops being a choice.

MMORPGs are historically bad PvP gaming experiences. So you know just be aware of that and the many issues you're going to face trying to play this game with PvP at the forefront of your gaming experience.

I agree that choices should have consequence, but the fact that alignment is tied to some loot means that it becomes less of a choice and becomes more of a decision. From a logical point of view, once you are on a certain alignment path, the correct decision is to max out your alignment. It's barely a choice at all specifically because one is better than the other.

 

More about this distinction here:

 

As soon as you tie in story to a system grounded with numbers and min/maxing, then it becomes a series of decisions instead of choices.

 

More appropriate "consequences" would involve changes in your story down the line, because then the pros and cons of each choice becomes subjective instead of objective.

My characters make their choices of what to say depending on what type of personality/morality I envision them to have, not wether it's light or dark, if that screw's me over later I'll just have to deal with it, it's my choice and I love it.

The problem with your last suggestion is that classes have absolutely zero replay value. So say I want to play agent, I want to get good gear but I also quite enjoy the story and don't just want to be pidgeon-holed into either a baby-eating anti-christ or jesus incarnate. So I go through, choosing choices based on the personality I've given to my char and now I can't get any of the good alignment based loot. I'm certainly not gonna re-roll because why would I? I'd know every single thing that'd happen, every quest, every story element, there's not a shred of anything new on my second playthrough.

 

Personality, I don't mind alignment based items so long as they don't prevent me from enjoying myself. For a lot of alignment based stuff I've found you can get equally as good alternatives elsewhere. The only situation I've found that alignment restrictions are absolutely retarded is when it comes to color crystals. "Hurr durr the color red is evil so only darksiders and baby-killers can use it", yeah, screw that. Canon jedi used red lightsabers and besides, what about non-fs classes? But that's a rant for another topic.

 

BASICALLY what I'm trying to say is, while from a design standpoint it really was not the smartest decision for a story-based MMO, it doesn't effect much in the long run.

If the classes have zero replay value, then (forgetting all about alignment gear, or ANY bonuses to alignment) these alleged "choices" made in your class story are really just "problems", because they lead to the exact same outcome: The preset story the Devs made for the agent. No, I don't care how much you and Kaliyo hate the job and want to become a Jedi on Tython, it won't happen. No matter how much your character wants it. Either way, it's either

a) the game is constantly changed throughout, and choices keep different rerolls of the same class fresh and not-boring.

b) alignment is something to grab in addition to the pre-set story the Devs have laid out

for the class, so alignment doesn't hinder game story at all, just your mental role-playing entertainment.

The devs in the past have alluded to the former, in which case you should reroll. If in fact in actuality it is the latter, than the devs have been lying to us for a long time, and we should just cancel all our preorders.

Oh, wait...

As a smuggler, I intend on going neutral. This will most likely frustrate me at times, but I think it will still be fun. Isn't the whole point of going dark side to try to achieve power or an extreme objective? So...if you don't have what it takes to do those things that most believe are "too dark" in the name of completing your objective, I suppose you don't have what it takes to be recognized as a true dark side baddie.

A Jedi would love to use force powers to get back at that jerk that cut him off, but he would resist because he is supposed to be above such things. No ultimate goodie gear for a bad jedi.

Sure, my character would love to have dark side gear, but she would be squeamish about killing kittens, etc. Likewise, if she was asked to dump her cargo to save someone's life, it had better be a ship full of orphans. Anyone else can go jump in a sarlak.

I agree that choices should have consequence, but the fact that alignment is tied to some loot means that it becomes less of a choice and becomes more of a decision. From a logical point of view, once you are on a certain alignment path, the correct decision is to max out your alignment. It's barely a choice at all specifically because one is better than the other.

 

More about this distinction here:

 

As soon as you tie in story to a system grounded with numbers and min/maxing, then it becomes a series of decisions instead of choices.

 

More appropriate "consequences" would involve changes in your story down the line, because then the pros and cons of each choice becomes subjective instead of objective.

+1 and a great video

IMO Alignment should not have an unfair impact on the game; when a character must ‘choose’ to do specific actions then you have redesigned the idea of choice. As has been already stated in other posts, I find myself being ‘pressured’ to make ‘choices’ because it is going to have a negative impact on the gear I can acquire. So my SI that loves a challenge and will fight, kill, and maim anything in my path but lives by a code that won’t allow him to kill a defenseless child ( the child may grow up and allow a greater challenge) is going to be gear gimped?

So what’s the solution? Well there have been a few reasonable suggestions in this post: Equal gear for light/dark/neutral, a cap of 1000 to light or dark side, or remove alignment specific items all together (my Glock 10mm doesn’t care if it wielded by a sinner or a saint)

…… just my 2 credits