Beyond Good and Evil in Games

Several games now incorporate "ethics and morals" in their gameplay. Games like Knights of the Old Republic (KotoR), Fable and more recently - inFamous all have a good and evil side. In these games, the player through gameplay and in game choices get to become "evil" or "good". Yet these games don't really present real ethical choices, Think about the choice of harvesting the Little Sisters in Bioshock. There is no real difference between these two choices besides the ending. You will still get Adam and nothing in the game world changes. In the game inFamous as in KotoR, the choice of good or evil only leads to different weapon choices and abilities. There is no gray area in these games.

In Baldur's Gate and Fallout (the first two games), there usually was a "good" and "evil" choice. The usual evil route would be to just kill or use an aggressive action while the good route would usually be trying to help an individual. As players, do we really get affected by these choices or does it just end up being some statistic which we try to push one way to get the maximum advantage in the game? Fallout and Baldur's Gate "morality" system consists of your reputation in the world. Good characters tend to get better prices in merchants and don't get attacked by guards. Evil characters had things more difficult except for certain moments. However these games were far better to KotoR in their decision making as you had more freedom in your choice. However, it boils down to just statistics in the game world unless the player tries to think over the choice. For instance, when Yoshimo - a thief in Baldur's Gate 2 betrays your party sometime in the game, if you were playing a lawful good character, did one stick to being all good? What is the reason for sticking to being good when you probably felt betrayed and want revenge against your former comrade? If these thoughts passed your mind, then probably the game had a real moral choice to be made otherwise it's just another statistic in the game.