|
Nihilism pervades the universe of the Fallout Series on a metaphysical level. This is a marked separation from the theistic metaphysics of traditional American RPG, which is embodied by the Dungeon & Dragons family of games (both pencil & paper and VG incarnations). The differences might be summed up by simply stating that one is a Fantasy RPG, while the other is a Post-Apocalyptic RPG. Given that a hypothetical (and some actual) RPG(s) do blend such sub-genres, a more detailed discussion is in order.
D&D is a universe of planes and deities. The reality which player characters can experience is not limited to a single plane/dimension: without bogging the discussion down with specifics, the player character or party (group of player characters) can travel to a number of different dimensions (based on their levels and abilities).
Further, the player character can affect and is affected by different planes even when centered on an entirely different plane. As an example, a spellcast might call forth a creature or even force of nature from another plane, or it might banish an enemy to another plane; depending on the complexity of a campaign, the party might be forced to travel as a group to a different plane (or several) in order to rescue a party member or as a major plot point. The multiplicity of planes gives players access to a variety of powers and abilities.
Beyond the blended reality of D&D games, the metaphysics of D&D contains deities. The system of deities is quite complex, with Elemental Gods, demiurges, demigods and so on.
The historiography & cosmogony of D&D indicate that specific deities have control over certain realms, planes, and forces. Player characters are most often bound to one of these Gods, granting the player special bonuses and abilities: penalties may be instituted for straying from the player's deity's path.
The Deities, just like player characters, are placed somewhere on the biaxial Alignment Grid: Good/Evil & Order/Chaos, where Neutrality is the center between these opposites. Deities can thus be Lawful Good, Chaotic Neutral, Neutral Evil, etc. [I know that D&Dophiles will get upset with these gross generalizations, but I think they are acceptable for the discussion at hand]
RPGs of Asian origin are often quite similar to the D&D system in their metaphysics; a major difference often arises from the lack of specific deities. Instead a pervasive Spirit sustains the world; in these games,the Spirit may have 'good', 'evil', and 'neutral' incarnations, but ultimately they all serve the same goal: balance in the universe. In theistic universes, the player has a guiding set of principles, which are predetermined; these principles constitute a context for moral choice.
Whether following the ethos of their personal deity, or seeking to achieve universal balance, choices are more or less clearly defined as either advancing or obstructing the goals of the player. These goals themselves are dictated by the moral structure imposed through the narrative. Any moral ambiguity that exists is due to the relative clarity of connections between choice and consequence.
The Fallout series, by contrast, has no *controlling* deities and has a single plane of existence. Players can never find themselves within a different or separated world (the Matrix-like dream world within Fallout 3 is merely a subset of the existing physical reality, not a separate plane); with only a single plane of existence, all aggressive are final: spirits of NPCs, friend and foe alike, are not recoverable nor is death reversible. Short of a reload, death (for any character) is truly terminal.
This is quite different than D&D and all similar universes, wherein the player may resurrect friends and opponents, or speak to their spirits, in order to further a plot temporarily halted by an unfortunate death (in VGs this realm of action is obviously more limited than a tabletop where a GM has flexibility). The single plane of existence basically means that what a player sees is what they get: magical and spiritual powers are nowhere to be found.
While historical religions are referenced, and even a few post-Apocalyptic new religions are present (i.e. the Children of Atom), there is no controlling deity: that is, no deity will intervene on the player's behalf, or act against the player based on the player's decision making or alignment.
An important point: Fallout lacks the biaxial Alignment grid ofD&D, instead relying on the Karmic system, wherein good deeds gain Karma, and evil deeds lose Karma. Here there is obviously no preset moral framework; instead, the player must choose how they wish to be perceived by the inhabitants of such a desolate world, and act accordingly. Moral ambiguity is part and parcel of the Fallout universe.
Morality is humanistic within the Fallout series, and theistic within the D&D universe (even neutrality is a religio-social choice in D&D). In Fallout 3, no god commands evil behavior from evil characters, it is the player who chooses to be evil or good. While Neutral Neutral PCs in the D&D universe closely approximate this, there is still a difference in that deities can still aid and deter the NN PC.
D&D and Fallout would be polar opposites if charted on a continuum, axis, or biaxial grid. The differences in metaphysics between the two systems can be summed up by the ways in which the systems restrict and license actions: D&D allows for more freedom of physical action, and less freedom in moral choice; Fallout allows for fewer physical actions, yet gives more freedom to moral choice.
During the design phase, the metaphysical underpinnings of the game world should be of paramount importance in discussion and decision making. It is possible to blend systems like D&D and Fallout to provide broad license within both the physical and moral realms, or to tightly restrict both; game mechanics and narrative structure have a common foundation in the solution of this specific issue. Ignoring this aspect will lead to a game world that has (possibly serious) immersion problems.
|
1) The Fallout series is a 3 games while there are what, at least 100 D+D licensed games I'd guess. Different games had different concepts of the metaphysics. I just think it kind of makes for a lopsided comparison. Perhaps it would been better to focus just on the pen and paper D+D games' deities -- or maybe just Planescape Torment, which deals most specifically with these areas of the D+D mythos.
2) Also felt perhaps it wasn't fair to use Fallout because it has no deities and not much theology involved, doesn't this apply to pretty much %90 + of games around? I guess this point any my last can just be summed up with 'I think a tighter focus would have helped' .
3) If you were to look at the Fallout series, I feel there has to be a huge distinction made between Fallout 1/2 and Fallout 3. Fallout 3 was typically very simple in it's morale play: the Karma point system was more of a hold-over gimmick from the earlier game, allowing players to be 'good' or 'bad', similar to the system popularized by Bioware's KOTOR. Fallout 1/2 had a much better creative and deep relationship with morality, and much more freedom: for example, some circumstances could be 'solved' in many ways, and your consequences went beyond the Karma point system, to actually see unintended results play out from your actions.
4) This is just a comment I guess: but perhaps it would be interesting to talk about 'God'-type games; games like Sims 3 or Populous or whatever, where the player is invested with the equivalent of deity status to digital lives on running on his computer/console. Otherwise, you also may want to look at games that specifically dealt with metaphysical concepts, such as the Cosmology of Kyoto ( http://www.homeoftheunderdogs.net/game.php?id=1906 ) or say, Nethack, which allowed the player to pray to Gods and the game's Gods had direct impact in play.
The concept of the relationship of game-world deities on gameplay, and the question of morality and nihilism is quite fascinating, and I hope you might want to explore it some future pieces.
Please note, I'm just saying these for constructive and conversational purposes -- it isn't my intention to deride your fine article in anyways.
@Simon - I wasn't meaning to imply any fault on Gamasutra's part: i figured i'd screwed it up some how - Thanks for the fix!
@Kevin - I appreciate the criticism! I was trying to say something without it turning into a 30 page academic paper, so basically every point got truncated badly. In other words, I agree with your points. A friend and I have discussed at length how much more effectively 'dark' the worlds of Fallout 1 and 2 were, the moral morass there being quite murky! I'll fine tune the thoughts in another piece, and allow myself a bit more lenght to do it right. Thanks for the thoughtful comments!
I find where this discussion gets even more interesting is when you consider the game world to *BE* the metaphysical plane...
What does it say about our own western culture with its entertainment-based skew on spirituality (metaphysics) when so many people connect with wasteland worlds like the Capital Wasteland? Seeing the sacred monuments of our most powerful shared beliefs in ruins and crawling with monstrous parrodies of society is a powerful comment on the current state of our collective world view. Delving into dungeons or climbing mountains have always had their own powerful psychological value.
It's interesting to note that Tolkien's world had no metaphysical 'otherworld' but that he uses his descriptions of natural landscapes and underground worlds with such poetic confidence that there was always a sense of mysticism at work. His description of Ithilien right before Sam and Frodo cross the threshold into Mordor becomes a serene portrait of someone making a final peace after a hopelessly perilous journey (the fifth stage of grief).
If I had any hint of that level of mysticism in Fallout 3 (or any other game) it was walking into Oasis.
I find the oh-so simple breakdown of moral choice to a grid (karma points, holy points, whatever) another clunky game device that will one day be outgrown. I also have to wonder about the message of a game that frames 'bad karma' or 'just plain evil' as a fair and acceptable 'lifestyle' choice. Granted it's difficult to frame the natural result of bad choices (lying=nobody trusts you) without seeming condescending; but having the mechanism so completely ballanced makes it a bit pointless to me.
I could blather on all day...
Excellent work man! (it almost feels like part of my 'spirituality' blog was re-written in more gamer-friendly terms)
Tolkien's metaphysics run quite deep (see "The Music of the Ainar" in 'The Silmarillion' - a most extraordinary composition of Neo-Platonism and Modern Physics) even if they're never explicated in LotR, and I agree with you that it shows through in a mystical way. I was pretty saddened by the subtraction of the Tom Bombadil episode from the first movie (couldn't have fit it into the extended cut, Mr. Jackson?!?) - Old Tom is the symbolic and thematic foil to Sauron, but anyway...
I have to disagree with you slightly on Fallout 3: I think that the inclusion of the ability to go all bad is what makes being all good have some actual meaning (at least for me). If it isn't possible for me to stray from the path, then I'm not really making a decision to be good, am I? Maybe instead of rewarding moral choices (of any sort) with loot, let the choices solely affect player/NPC interaction. I would, however, like to have seen tougher choices (like in The Pitt expansion) forcing the player to get a little grittier, adding more meaning and depth to walking the right path. This is part of the discussion that I really wanted to get into in more depth, so I'm working on a slightly longer piece that explores the connection between metaphysics, game mechanics, and latitude in moral choice.
I'm designing a game system (a framework kinda like the AD&D rules but for VGs), and I've developed the core of a personality modeling system that hopefully is a bit more organic than the 9 box grid of D&D. I hope yall will get see it in action someday soon...
Yes, when you include the Silmarillion it gets much deeper. It's funny how he clips neatly around all of those spiritual elements in his trilogy though. The only moment I recall a direct reference was the actions of Faramir's men at dinner time, facing west to 'that which is eternal.'
In Fallout 3, I'm thinking specifically of the 'rewards' one gets for being evil... although I didn't really play a baddie so I don't know what they were exactly. Did the rewards just make it a ballanced scenario? It makes for an odd commentary to say that good and evil are "six of one half-dozen of another." Like in Bioshock, the choice was *meant* to be evil - easier, more seductive - (thanks Yoda) or compassionate - more rewarding in long-term - it just didn't quite work. A truism I can live with if somewhat simplistic.
The funny thing about The Pitt was I still wonder if I made the 'correct' choice. There was no clear good/evil to it and I'm sure it would have left a haunting feeling no matter what I chose. I rather cursed having to make the choice at all. I find that... interesting.
@Frank - You're right about Tolkien supressing the deeper side of his universe in LotR; I wonder if it had anything to do with his comment about staying away from real religions in his stories, that doing so would be "fatal". Also, you're dead on about The Pitt - that's the sort of grittiness i was referring to: you want to do the right thing, and tried to, but did you? I think that's great storytelling, er, storyplaying!
One of my alltime favorite authors is G.R.R. Martin. There are characters in the 'Song of Ice and Fire' that I just love and think are cool, and others i hate, but there's none i find totally uninteresting or that don't provoke some visceral response from me. It's crazy to see, on teh interwebs, that people get just as much out of the books as me, yet have totally different responses to the same characters. I guess that may not be a very good anecdote on moral relativity and good narrative, but anyway...
Thanks to all for taking the time to read my meanderings, and thanks even more for responding so insightfully!
My experience is that the villains in JRPGs most of the time have some weird nazi-kind-of-twisted notion about "the ubermensch" and some other european philosophies that makes their actions justifiable. "The weak ones are there to justify the strong", eh?
In general when discussing 'fantastic genres' I'd say that fantasy often has deities, gods, metaphysics, while sci-fi has not (especially cyberpunk/postaopcalypse) and horror has sometimes.