Too many of the quests give you light or dark side points that make no sense. For example, if you kill the criminal, knowing that he will seek revenge on the innocent that sent you, you will get dark side points. But if you let the evil criminal live and he kills the innocents, you get light side points.

It really looks like you guys did not put much thought into this.

The problem is also that there is no uniformity in their decisions on giving light/dark on certain situations.

Example: you get light points spying on the two padawan kissing each others, but you get dark point for being honest about the incompetency ofthe Lieutenant that almost caused a rebel base to be reduced to ruins... Not considering that you don't get dark side points for having a relationship with your padawan, as a JK...

That's because you're thinking "Light Side" = "Good" and "Dark Side" = "Evil".

Which is somewhat erroneous.

Granted, sometimes, the choices just aren't satisfactory. But that is much because it is a guessing game how your character is going to react when picking a certain choice. I have no idea why they went for the dialogue wheel thing in this game; it's complete nonsense.

I regularly have to restart any given dialogue 5-6 times before I get the "right" replies for my character. If they even exist.

The strangest one to me is the first LS/DS option in the Sith Warrior storyline.

Not really spoiling much of anything at all seeing as it occurs within the first 5 levels or so of gameplay, but putting it under spoiler tags just because it technically is a class mission.

So it's not even really about Light = Good/Moral and Dark = Bad/Immoral, because that certainly wasn't the case here. And it's not even that Light = Jedi and Dark = Sith either.

Instead, I tend to feel like whether a result is marked as LS or DS is based more upon the perceptions of the specific faction you are on. (As opposed to the LS or DS options being based upon a universal concept such as 'What a Jedi would choose' versus 'What a Sith would choose.') For example, as in the spoilered section above: both of your options seem very "Sith-like," but the one that rewards DS points is more chaotic, and the one that rewards LS points makes you out to be a more calculating Sith (but a Sith nonetheless). That's how some of them seem anyway. There are still those options that seem very blatantly Sith vs. Jedi, just not all of them follow that pattern.

For example, as in the spoilered section above: both of your options seem very "Sith-like," but the one that rewards DS points is more chaotic, and the one that rewards LS points makes you out to be a more calculating Sith (but a Sith nonetheless). That's how some of them seem anyway.

I'd tend to agree; lightside seems to be about putting aside your own immediate desires to further some other goal; your own good, the good of your faction, whatever. Darkside is going with your impulses, reacting emotionally to the situation. What you're actually doing doesn't seem to matter so much as your presumed state of mind when you're doing it.

I'd tend to agree; lightside seems to be about putting aside your own immediate desires to further some other goal; your own good, the good of your faction, whatever. Darkside is going with your impulses, reacting emotionally to the situation. What you're actually doing doesn't seem to matter so much as your presumed state of mind when you're doing it.

This is my observation as well. In this game (not saying that this is true for all star wars lore ) they seem to have equated DS to letting your id controll you while LS is when you are using your superego dictate your actions.

But even that does not seem to explain all their choices.

I'd tend to agree; lightside seems to be about putting aside your own immediate desires to further some other goal; your own good, the good of your faction, whatever. Darkside is going with your impulses, reacting emotionally to the situation. What you're actually doing doesn't seem to matter so much as your presumed state of mind when you're doing it.

Precisely so. For those who have played through Hoth as a Sith Warrior, the "promote the Chiss officer" versus "promote the Human officer" scenario is another good example.

This is my observation as well. In this game (not saying that this is true for all star wars lore ) they seem to have equated DS to letting your id controll you while LS is when you are using your superego dictate your actions.

 

But even that does not seem to explain all their choices.

Admittedly it does seem to bounce between situations where (to use your terms) DS = Id and LS = Superego, and then the situations where it's more morally cut and dry--"Blow the building up with the civilian vessel inside" versus "Let the civilian vessel leave first." However, I am struggling to think of a situation that doesn't fit one or the other.

Admittedly it does seem to bounce between situations where (to use your terms) DS = Id and LS = Superego, and then the situations where it's more morally cut and dry--"Blow the building up with the civilian vessel inside" versus "Let the civilian vessel leave first." However, I am struggling to think of a situation that doesn't fit one or the other.

There's a Rep side Taris quest that doesn't really fit either one imo.

But generally, you're right, they seem to fit one of the two types.

There's a Rep side Taris quest that doesn't really fit either one imo.

 

 

You find a group of soldiers that have gone AWOL with a bunch of supplies for one of the camps and intend to desert. Your LS option is to tell them it's ok and let them desert. DS is to tell them to **** and do their job.

 

Now, to me, this DS option is clearly more helping of your faction. You -could- make the argument that morally it's better to leave them alone so that's why that choice is LS but, personally, I think morally it's also right to tell them "Hey, you signed up for this. You don't have the right to suddenly ditch all your friends and coworkers and leave them to die because you took their supplies with you when you left. So get over it and go back to camp."

 

 

But generally, you're right, they seem to fit one of the two types.

Light, to me, generally means mercy and compassion of the moment.

Dark, on the other hand, means selfish desires/lack of compassion.

For instance, in the scenario where you can choose to let the assassin (would-be assassin, since she didn't finish the job) live, you're showing compassion to her, specifically, by not just executing her on the spot. While this means she'll go on to kill more people, it's simply the short-sighted nature of compassion; you feel for this person, right now, without thinking of the longer-term ramifications.

Let's say you were to find a tiny child, say two years old, bawling and crying his eyes out, because he fell and skinned his knees and can't find his mommy. You have three options:

Light side: Pick him up, comfort him, and help him find his mom.

Dark side: Tell him to 'man up' and walk it off, then leave him there.

Most people would help the child, because it's compassionate to do so. If you found out later that he grew up to be a mass-murderer, you'd probably feel bad for helping him. But at the time, the compassionate choice was to help a crying child, regardless of the long-term consequences.

Similarly, with the spoiler above...

... letting your id controll you while LS is when you are using your superego dictate your actions.

so THAT's where freud got his ideas from!

Choosing to call their morality spectrum "Light Side" and "Dark Side" was an absolutely horrible idea. When I started on day one, I assumed that going all "Light Side" with my Sith Inq would mean that she was, you know, LIGHT SIDE. As in, used the Light Side of the Force. She had the misfortune of being born in the Sith Empire, was forced to go to the Sith Academy, but she's chosen to follow the Light and be a bastion of good in the heart of evil, and blah blah blah. But that is not remotely how it works. She's absolutely, 100% a Dark Side embracing Sith, she's just not a total raving psychopath.

Now that I know better, I don't remotely pay attention to what alignment points I get. I just pick whatever fits best for my character at the time. I enjoy the game so much more that way. It doesn't make much difference as far as gameplay, either. The relics for Light or Dark V aren't all that much better than IV, which is pretty easy to get for most character types, and HMs and Ops have relics that aren't alignment restricted anyway.

Light, to me, generally means mercy and compassion of the moment.

Dark, on the other hand, means selfish desires/lack of compassion.

 

For instance, in the scenario where you can choose to let the assassin (would-be assassin, since she didn't finish the job) live, you're showing compassion to her, specifically, by not just executing her on the spot. While this means she'll go on to kill more people, it's simply the short-sighted nature of compassion; you feel for this person, right now, without thinking of the longer-term ramifications.

I see what you're saying here. That really does tend to be true, and would explain why certain scenarios are morally ambiguous. There is a DS option in which you free a Jedi from imprisonment on Korriban (you save his life), so that he can return to his Jedi buddies with false information that will leave them vulnerable. Now that would be a DS option that is short-term compassionate (saving the Jedi's life), but long-term sinister (plotting to leave the Jedi's defenseless against a Sith attack), which contradicts the format you mentioned above. However, it could certainly also be argued that the relevant information (when it comes to LS versus DS labeling) is not whether or not you have saved the Jedi's life, but whether or not you have lied to the Jedi. Even though you're saving his life in the short-term, you are certainly lying and being deceptive to him in the short-term as well. (The Light Side scenario is telling him the truth, though I don't know how it plays out, as I didn't go with that option.) With that in mind, your format for LS/DS labeling certainly still applies, even in that scenario.

I like your idea quite a lot, especially as far as trying to figure out why Bioware labeled things the way they did. It's a very good theory. Presumably they had to have some unifying idea of how to label the options, even if it leaves them morally gray in the big picture, and your format does a good job of explaining it. I just don't quite understand why that was the particular format they went with, given that your character is supposed to think of the long-term ramifications--or at least that's what the "save the traitor" situation suggests. (I'm referring to the part where you go back to the overseer and he essentially pats you on the back for thinking in the long-term.)

In short, I don't think we're really intended to play pure LS or DS characters, even though that's exactly what the game mechanics encourage you to do. My very LS Sith Warrior, for example, killed Thana Vesh on Taris because she's a menace to society, and accepted the DS hit she took for it.

Personally, I agree. My DS Sith Warrior does accumulate a handful of LS points simply due to the fact that some of the LS options are more conniving and/or serve the Empire to a greater degree than the DS options. Though she did get stuck with 50 LS points once by default, since a suitable neutral/DS option for her personality didn't exist, and the LS one was the only one I could even reasonably stretch into her mindset.

The dumbest light side choice ever to me is on Coruscant.

So you're contracted by a citizen's group called the 'True Republic' to find evidence that a senator is a Sith Sympathizer intending to hand over the Republic to the Sith....legally.

You find his messenger droid and disable it, taking the proof of such. Only for the Senator's aide to stop you, and tell you what you're doing is wrong and that the Senator is using legal means, and you're repressing his 'freedom of speech.'

The light side choice at that point is to preserve his freedom of speech by giving a different package to the True Republic that would make them look like fools once it comes to light.

The dark side choice is to follow through and deliver the evidence, thus preventing the Senator's plans.

I could see the first perhaps being Light side, albeit lawful stupid if you didn't deliver the doctored evidence and just refused the task after meeting with the aide, but as it stands I consider it the greater of two evils. You're permitting evil to flourish by inaction, and stymying the group trying to stop it.

The dark side choice doesn't seem dark side at all to me, sometimes the laws must be bent for an action which is good.

Ethan: didn't you know? Whistleblowing is evil!

The one I will never understand is on Ord Mantell, available to Troopers/Smugglers:

Too many of the quests give you light or dark side points that make no sense. For example, if you kill the criminal, knowing that he will seek revenge on the innocent that sent you, you will get dark side points. But if you let the evil criminal live and he kills the innocents, you get light side points.

 

It really looks like you guys did not put much thought into this.

Yeah they gave the LS DS choices weird opinions.

I see what you're saying here. That really does tend to be true, and would explain why certain scenarios are morally ambiguous. There is a DS option in which you free a Jedi from imprisonment on Korriban (you save his life), so that he can return to his Jedi buddies with false information that will leave them vulnerable. Now that would be a DS option that is short-term compassionate (saving the Jedi's life), but long-term sinister (plotting to leave the Jedi's defenseless against a Sith attack), which contradicts the format you mentioned above. However, it could certainly also be argued that the relevant information (when it comes to LS versus DS labeling) is not whether or not you have saved the Jedi's life, but whether or not you have lied to the Jedi. Even though you're saving his life in the short-term, you are certainly lying and being deceptive to him in the short-term as well. (The Light Side scenario is telling him the truth, though I don't know how it plays out, as I didn't go with that option.) With that in mind, your format for LS/DS labeling certainly still applies, even in that scenario.

 

I like your idea quite a lot, especially as far as trying to figure out why Bioware labeled things the way they did. It's a very good theory. Presumably they had to have some unifying idea of how to label the options, even if it leaves them morally gray in the big picture, and your format does a good job of explaining it. I just don't quite understand why that was the particular format they went with, given that your character is supposed to think of the long-term ramifications--or at least that's what the "save the traitor" situation suggests. (I'm referring to the part where you go back to the overseer and he essentially pats you on the back for thinking in the long-term.)

Yeah, some of the follow-up to the choices seems to be at odds with the idea of it, and I think in some ways some of the choices DO come across as a bit schizophrenic. But overall, it seems to hang together fairly well. With regards to the jedi captured on Korriban, the dark side option is to let him go with his head full of lies, essentially "betraying" him (you were pretending to be nice to him, and finally making a choice to fulfill the scheming goal you set out for, which does show a lack of compassion for him). The light side version is to tell him he's been lied to, and that the whole point was to get him to go back and tell the jedi a pastiche of lies. It's showing compassion for him at the last moment, and not being willing to use him like a pawn. So I think it still works.

The dumbest light side choice ever to me is on Coruscant.

 

So you're contracted by a citizen's group called the 'True Republic' to find evidence that a senator is a Sith Sympathizer intending to hand over the Republic to the Sith....legally.

 

You find his messenger droid and disable it, taking the proof of such. Only for the Senator's aide to stop you, and tell you what you're doing is wrong and that the Senator is using legal means, and you're repressing his 'freedom of speech.'

 

The light side choice at that point is to preserve his freedom of speech by giving a different package to the True Republic that would make them look like fools once it comes to light.

 

The dark side choice is to follow through and deliver the evidence, thus preventing the Senator's plans.

 

I could see the first perhaps being Light side, albeit lawful stupid if you didn't deliver the doctored evidence and just refused the task after meeting with the aide, but as it stands I consider it the greater of two evils. You're permitting evil to flourish by inaction, and stymying the group trying to stop it.

 

The dark side choice doesn't seem dark side at all to me, sometimes the laws must be bent for an action which is good.

See, that's why it's the dark side choice. You're subverting the law for "the greater good", but you're still subverting the law. You're removing the senator's right to present his argument and have it be heard. By taking his choice away from him, you're saying "My belief is superior to yours, and yours must not be heard!"

It comes back to it being rather selfish. The aide even points out, as you said, that by doing this you're spitting in the very face of the ideals of the republic. Yes, his opinions might be unpopular. Yes, they might even be considered "treasonous" by some. But he has the right to be heard. And the other senators can vote on it.

The light side choice is agreeing with the principles of the republic, and allowing the democratic machine to work. The dark side choice is selfishly assuming that your own beliefs (or in this case, the 'True Republic' folks) are more important than the senator's.

It's why it's the dark side choice. The more you "take the law into your own hands", the more likely you are to just ignore the law entirely. It's a step down the path towards darkness.

See, that whole 'you're preventing the Senator from exercising their free speech rights!' doesn't make sense to me. It's evidence of the Senator's intentions in that packet, no? All taking it will do is let you back up your accusations; doesn't prevent the Senator from still talking, making their arguments, presenting whatever supporting information they need because whatever it is isn't going to exist in only one, specifically hardcopy, format, right?

That whole quest actually made very little sense to me.

See, that whole 'you're preventing the Senator from exercising their free speech rights!' doesn't make sense to me. It's evidence of the Senator's intentions in that packet, no? All taking it will do is let you back up your accusations; doesn't prevent the Senator from still talking, making their arguments, presenting whatever supporting information they need because whatever it is isn't going to exist in only one, specifically hardcopy, format, right?

 

 

That whole quest actually made very little sense to me.

Well, there's nothing to really "accuse" him of. He was planning on saying everything you could accuse him of right there to the rest of the senate. So it's not like he's planning some dark, secretive thing that he's only hinting at. He's going to openly state it, because it's his right to do so as a senator.

And you have to remember, this is the Star Wars universe. Very few people here believe in backups, fuses, surge protectors, or anything like that. So that may well have been his only copy.

Well, there's nothing to really "accuse" him of. He was planning on saying everything you could accuse him of right there to the rest of the senate. So it's not like he's planning some dark, secretive thing that he's only hinting at. He's going to openly state it, because it's his right to do so as a senator.

Was he planning to do it right then, rather than, say, after he'd bought a few dozen Senators? Also, do Senate meetings tend to be open to the public/broadcast? I'd come out of that quest with the impression that his arguments were going to be only to fellow Senators and only a few months down the line or so, and we were alerting the Republic people to his dastardly plan, or some such.

Was he planning to do it right then, rather than, say, after he'd bought a few dozen Senators? Also, do Senate meetings tend to be open to the public/broadcast? I'd come out of that quest with the impression that his arguments were going to be only to fellow Senators and only a few months down the line or so, and we were alerting the Republic people to his dastardly plan, or some such.

I thought he was planning on doing it right that day, on the senate floor. I could be misremembering though, I haven't done the quest in like a month or so.

I've got a new jedi on coruscant though, so I'll have to pay attention to the quest when I do it with her.

I thought he was planning on doing it right that day, on the senate floor. I could be misremembering though, I haven't done the quest in like a month or so.

 

I've got a new jedi on coruscant though, so I'll have to pay attention to the quest when I do it with her.

I interpreted that quest as:

He wants to turn the Republic over to the Sith

He's not going to directly say, "Hey, let's join the Sith!", because that will fail

Instead, he's going to put forth a series of actions that he hopes will subvert the Republic until it is forced or tricked into joining the Sith

The document details his true plans about his upcoming proposals.

The LS option is the Lawful Neutral action - you really don't have any right taking his docs without a warrant.

The DS option is the Neutral Good action - you're breaking to the law, but exposing an evil plot.