Random thought: there is no 'right' solution

[Mr. Teatime]

One thing I often find in RPGs is that there's one solution that yields better rewards than all others. Whether that is a nice item, or more quests to do, or whatever.
So whatever your feelings on the quest, it's tempting to take this right path just so you experience more of the game.
I'd like Bethesda to make it so that you can get stuff out of the game regardless of what you do. If you kill the questgiver coz he's pissing you off, that opens up a new quest somewhere else - his disgruntled family set a mad killer on your tail, or whatever.
Essentially, reward all possible paths as equally as you can (though in different ways).

[Fa11lloutfan_15]

As long as each reward follows logically to the corresponding path, and more effort, skill and thought is required for the more rewarding solutions, I only believe this to be an advantage. If all solutions yield equal rewards, there would be no incentive to put more effort and think carefully about your choices, as it wouldn't matter which path you chose.

[Koki]

I'd like to see being evil being easier and giving more than being good. Even FO didn't have that right.

[vx trauma]

democracy and dr phil doesn't exist and are totally useless in the world after the bombs. being good in nuclear holocaust theme world gives trivial benefits in the social puppet play affairs. badasses reap the most moolah from their actions. suggesting the other is the autotalk from zombified church people.

[VasikkA]

I want to see more obscure and unexpected outcomes, e.g. "You whacked my cousin in Junkville prepare to die!" or "I promised I'd give you this amulet as a reward but now I won't haha what do you do now, big boy?".

Essentially, reward all possible paths as equally as you can (though in different ways).

Life aint equal. I can see your point, especially if your actions only are determined by the final payoff but that's not really how roleplaying works, or is it?

[St. Toxic]

Fallout did a pretty good job with it, if you ask me. The more time and thought you put in, the bigger the treasure at the end. If you want to off people, the easy one-way out, that's fine, only you don't get as much dough as if you're a scientific, smoothtalking 15-step bastard. So, good, bad -- you're the guy with the gun.

[T-900]

Certainly, ruthlessness and cruelty will realistically reap a greater reward in the modern world. But in a society without law, without insurance, a man's word is a much tougher thing. All people have is trust or violence. Rewards will be well earned and good deeds truly appreciated in a world forced to be as honest as Fallout's.

I feel Fallout did things well. Good or bad, you can succeed.

I do hope Fallout3 won't become a lesson in moral consequences for the kiddies of the world.

"Bert the Turtle says; Commit crimes and your character's evolution will be crippled and your game less fun!"

"When you see the flash - Save the world 4 xtra faetures!"

[box]

So, maybe the evil, cold-hearted bastard types would earn more in monetary rewards, demanding more, extortion, etc. But maybe the 'kind' types would get more training, bartering, doing things for perks, no reward at all, or being completely used?

What about certain people responding differently to requests for more money for a quest or service, double-crosses sound like fun, also, maybe make the responders a bit idiosyncratic. Like, just because this poor little old lady is all nice to you doesn't mean she won't embellish the reward, or outright lie, when you rescue her two-headed kitty cat from the ghouls' weed or something? Like, individuals being individuals. An evil prick might occasionally keep his word, like Aron the Thief Guy sort of did in Bgate 2, and the little old lady in my awful example might turn out to be a terrible, mean person. Rambling. Just a thought.

[infirmaryblues]

In Oblivion(just wait...), there was a quest for this townsperson and he was positively paranoid. He had you spy on people that did nothing at all, and when you returned to him, you could tell the truth or lie about the one you watched; you got paid regardless. This was the fault of the quest, but at the end, he wanted you to kill them all for a good sum of money, and if you didn't, he tried killing you.

The best part of this quest was the character; he had personality and had me watching those people very closely for subtleties, that they really might be up to something. Where the structure of it failed, the personality was intact. I think this quest could be rebuilt correctly for FO3.

[Frater Perdurabo]

In Oblivion(just wait...), there was a quest for this townsperson and he was positively paranoid. He had you spy on people that did nothing at all, and when you returned to him, you could tell the truth or lie about the one you watched; you got paid regardless. This was the fault of the quest, but at the end, he wanted you to kill them all for a good sum of money, and if you didn't, he tried killing you.

The best part of this quest was the character; he had personality and had me watching those people very closely for subtleties, that they really might be up to something. Where the structure of it failed, the personality was intact. I think this quest could be rebuilt correctly for FO3.

The first time I installed Oblivion, I played it for about 2 hours, and that was one of the quests that I tried. I have to admit that, the person really did not fit into the general, uncharacteristic, monotonous world of Oblivion.

Nevertheless, I found the quest to be a mere nuisance.

[TelemachusSneezed]

I'd like to see being evil being easier and giving more than being good. Even FO didn't have that right.

Despite the terrible grammar of this comment, I like Koki's idea. Being good should be hard; being evil should be easier. Such is life before the bomb; imagine what it's like after!