Fallout Would Be Better Off Without The Karma System (2024)

I recently wrote about how Fallout 5 should go back to basics, and after Starfield returned to a silent protagonist and myriad other hallmarks from previous Bethesda games, I feel like it will. But how much homage should it pay to past games, and are there some parts of them worth leaving behind? When it comes to the karma system, I think there might be.

Back in the PS3 and Xbox 360 generation, karma systems felt like the future of gaming. We were no longer just finishing levels or playing through stories as a hero destined to defeat a bad guy. In some cases, we could be the bad guy.

Fallout 3’s Karma System Was Wonderful, But Now It’s Slightly Outdated

Fallout 2 was ahead of the curve with its karma system, which was similar in execution to mechanics we later saw in Mass Effect, Infamous, and Fable 2. But most people (myself included) wouldn’t be introduced to it until Fallout 3, a soft reboot helmed by Bethesda that brought the series into the third dimension.

You could be an angel in power armour, the devil in a blue jumpsuit, or an awkward in-between where you didn’t reap the benefits of either. Once you started to move in a certain direction, there was a mechanical and narrative incentive to see this moral compass through to the end. Fallout 3 even had Trophies and Achievements tied to reaching big level milestones with Good, Neutral, and Evil Karma. That’s three playthroughs right there.

See Also

Starfield's Maps Have a Hidden Functionality That Shouldn't be OverlookedStarfield's May Update Causes Head-Scratching New ProblemsThe Best Xbox Series X Games for 2024Zo zagen de Xbox Games Showcases er in het verleden uit (2014 - 2023) - XBNL

As a kid - I definitely wasn’t old enough to play Fallout 3 - I spent hundreds of hours on the dreaded PS3 version playing the game through several times, being good in one, evil in another, and neutral for the final playthrough as I edged closer and closer to the Platinum.

It felt novel at the time, because I was so used to video games which had a beginning, middle, and end while rarely bringing player choice into the equation. I didn’t grow up on PC gaming, and console RPGs were more about melodramatic anime boys than the consequences that my actions might have. When Fallout 3 came along, it changed how I thought about games.

Nuking Megaton is the core example of this, a good or evil decision which radically alters the game world and how you are perceived within it. Push the big red button early on, and you’re left with so much evil karma that it’s hard to come back from, while disarming it before killing Alastair Tenpenny and his cronies will put you in the good books for a long time.

You’ll make decisions like this throughout most of the main quests, pushing you down a handful of varied dialogue trees that ask you to be a good dude or a scheming villain. Going the middle route just isn’t very interesting, and much like Mass Effect or Infamous, you’ll be locked out of things worth having if you do. So you go Good or Evil, but I can’t help but feel this way of thinking is rote.

Moral Choices In Games Have Evolved, And Fallout Should Do The Same

The Witcher 3 was the first RPG of this size and scope to make that clear. You didn’t play as a custom-made character for one, with Geralt of Rivia a hardened monster hunter who says he is only living for the coin, but, under the surface, cares deeply about certain people and places. It’s required of the player to read into the moral implications of each dialogue choice and if they want to play Geralt as a ruthless hardass with no interest in his fellow man, or a man who holds a lot of trauma close to his chest, but doesn’t want people to suffer in the same ways he has. His dogged quest to save Ciri throughout the third game is all the proof you need, not to mention the ways in which he cares for Yennefer and Triss.

You’ve also got Baldur’s Gate 3, one of the most accomplished RPGs ever made that will constantly ride the lines between good and evil. You can play as The Dark Urge and give into such instincts, which is brilliant in itself, but the majority of the Tavs you create are free to take on this world however they see fit. You can be a deplorable murderer who storms the grove and murders innocents, or stand up against evildoers who stand in your way. Or my favourite way to go about things is to never make yourself predictable, making choices that are neither right nor wrong, but align with the values your character subscribes to.

Few Bethesda RPGs have ever managed to be this deep with their moral decisions, having to explain everything to the player in fear they end up doing something they regret. This is a game where the world has already ended, leaving survivors behind to look for scraps as they fight for their lives. The worst has already transpired, and you must decide whether you wanna add to the misery, strive for something better, or maybe land somewhere in the middle. It’s a series that would benefit from far less transparency, and a willingness to trust the player to make decisions that they will both be proud of and potentially regret, then they can tackle yet another playthrough to see it through all over again.

I’d still want to make allegiances with factions like the NCR and Brotherhood of Steel, but I’d love for the ways in which we move about these places to be far more complicated. A means to infiltrate, betray, or become more than a one-and-done wasteland explorer who has only a single road to walk. RPGs are strongest when they’re deep, complicated, and unpredictable, all qualities that Fallout 5 could do with embracing. If that means ditching karma, so be it.

Fallout 3

Fallout 3 takes place in a ruined area around Washington D.C. two hundred years after the Great War. In a game met with critical acclaim, you must traverse this wasteland looking for your father, while solving the mystery of his disappearance.