***Update***
After a discussion on gamedev.net forum here about this I have reached a new conclusion about the morality as a game mechanic.

The best implementation would be in a sandbox type game filled with lots of factions, each with its own agenda. The player has also its own agenda, and its actions are not labeled by the game itself as being good/evil, but by the factions the player interacts with. This way the player can play the game as it sees fit, without being compelled to go all the way good or all the way evil. I personally think the Mount & Blade game series provide an environment that implements a concept similar to my conclusion.
******

Ever since the Dungeons & Dragons rule system, players could chose the alignment of their character as part of the game’s “Morality” system. Back then it was a combination of factors leading to about 9 possible combinations, sometimes even more.

In the first D&D installments on the PC, the best games at the time were coming from a single great company: BioWare. Titles like Baldour’s Gate, Icewind Dale and Planescape Torment are still considered today some of the best RPGs out there.

Over time, the great minds of Bio Ware thought that it is pretty dull to have your alignment set in stone at the start of the game, so they designed a new morality system in which your alignment is established during gameplay, based on your choices and decisions. They also found the perfect setting for this: the Star Wars universe, and so the Knights of the Old Republic series was born. For the ones who didn’t play these great games, based on your good or evil actions, you would lean more towards one of the two sides of the force, slowly becoming a Jedi Knight or a Sith Lord, gaining more and more powers specific to one of the two possible paths.

However, there is an inherent flaw in this system. Continue reading →