Dont get me wrong, i don't blame a developer for it, cause like you said, a real system like that is nearly impossible to make. I simply state that mostly i tend to be disapointed in the end by such systems since there will always be a part of it that i disagree with.

1) Karma and faction are 2 different things. How is it wrong for Cass to think it's NOT ok to steal from anyone....she has that right. If you personally have subjective morality (it's ok to steal from someone you are opposed to in some way), that does not mean that it's a universal truth. Stealing is stealing (wrong) to some people.

2) & 3) Kind of go back to # 1 above. The things that give stealing karma points in the game are supposedly OWNED by someone. Taking them without permission should result in bad karma (it does not matter if you have good or bad faction with them). The not earning karma from taking someone's stuff after killing them is questionable, I agree, but that would force a rather rigid moral choice on looting a body(s) after every battle. I think of it as once I kill an enemy, I have "earned" their permission to take their stuff (yeah, kinda jaded and sketchy). I do agree that it is inconsistent at times, but I'm guessing that is due to different developers designing differing areas of the game and projecting some of their own personal morality into the scenario in question.

4) Do you feel (in RL) that you are not doing something wrong if nobody sees you or has proof you did it? If so, the karma system in this game is the least of your morality problems... Either that, or you have mistaken the term KARMA with CRIMINAL ACTIVITY. Karma is a concept beyond any legal definition of right or wrong.

No doubt the game could use some tweaking to the Karma system, but I think you might be projecting your personal (potential slightly twisted) morality onto the game's Karma system (that is designed to be more of a universal view) and thus deeming it "dreadful" (because it does not apply what you feel is proper rules of morality). Again, the system isn't perfect but your belief that it is "dreadful" can only lead me to believe you don't really understand the system or how "Karma" should work (or possibly means).

the reason games have it is because otherwise you get people screaming that they are bad for not having such a system.....then complain when it is not perfect

its the way of the world, you can never truly please someone, unless that someone makes it himself, then he can only blame himself. The main reason a game never gives everything i would hope or want, is simply because not everyone has the same needs or desires, you ultimately let one person down either way.

I agree the karma can be weird and annoying. Find a small camping site where the people there had been killed by a deathclaw? You get bad karma for taking their sugar bombs. Kill 300 raiders, steal all their stuff and cut off their fingers? A-ok. I don't think faction reputation will be a thing though sadly since Obsidian is the one who implemented it.

Save time and scrap the system entirely cuz it's dumb. Reputation system is where it's at.

I like how they implemented reputation but Karma has its issues.

Killing any innocent sprite should immediately set you to evil (or at least neutral), even with a Very Good status.

Now the problem is setting the definition of "Innocent."
For this, I'd like to say someone who:

• Has Good or Neutral Karma
• Someone who didn't attack, provoke, insult you or basically gave no reason for you to attack them.
• Having someone work in alignment to an "Evil" Faction doesn't automatically make them evil. For example: a guy who cooks for or sells to them, a researcher who happens to be working with them in the name of science(Anna Holt), a gangster person's son/daughter/wife/husband who wants nothing to do with them (Bishop's wife, daughter from FO2.)...
• I'd like to say kids but then a gain you have Legion kids who are excited to kill and join the ranks.

Finally, the whole thing with Karma-based companions shouldn't be overused. I have Jericho as a companion, gained Karma throughout the game and suddenly he won't join up again. So I go out and kill the guy begging for water but I'm still "GOOD" just because the numbers add up to good. Heck with VERY GOOD karma you can kill all of Megaton and the numbers would probably still be at the very least Neutral.

Heck, if companions in FONV had an Evil or Neutral Karma requirement, you'd be in deep sh-- because killing any of the random Fiends and Powder Gangers gives you Karma. I mean, I had a problem having to kill the Powder Ganger's Doctor and shopkeeper in the first place but I'm still rewarded Karma.

Having only a reputation system fits the setting a lot more, that's for sure. Morals are not something to worry about while living in a post-apocalyptic wasteland. Survival is priority number one, and building a pool of allies contributes to that.

I think karma and reputation have their place, but you're definitely right that they need to be changed. The only repeatable actions that should affect karma are radiant quests, but the bulk of karma should be from choices you make in quests. I don't mind karma being "psychic", since it's an abstract concept anyway and I think the only affect your karma itself should have is on ending slides and what kind of people come to your settlement. World encounters should factor in how you solved specific quests, rather than just a generic karma rating. Would also be cool if good and evil karma were measured separately, like reputations.

Reputation on the other hand needs to work more like the regional crime system in Skyrim; in New Vegas I only ever really noticed reputation when it was keeping me from doing something, or when one of those [censored] death squads comes after me (does the Legion send assassins to every schmuck that rubs them the wrong way? I should be vilified before they send their goons, not just shunned). And the disguises were a mess, too; I'd have rather they dumped the generic reputation effects of disguises and just given us stuff tailored to specific quests.

I think Faction Reputation is the best choice especially if there is more than a good side and an evil side..

Which I certainly hope is the case.

Your track record will determine the various factions attitudes and treatment of you.

What have you done for me and mine?

What have you done against me and mine?

Plus how in sync you are with my values and attitudes.

You might be a good person to have in a fight, but if you think civilian causalities are totally acceptable, then some groups will only want to deal with you at arm's reach.

Plus are you a sworn friend or foe (Someone who is committed is held to a higher standard be it committed to your side or to your enemies).

I see Karma as an older game mechanic that should be removed if they can't make good use of it some how in Fallout 4.

Karma could be used as a kind of what you know about yourself stat.

Reputation is what others know about you.

Honor is what you know about yourself.

Or what other whisper about you behind your back.

If people who cross you keep disappearing and anyone who joins you on a treasure hunt doesn't make it back leaving you in sole possession of the treasure...

Well if that happens enough times, then your reputation is going to be questionable even if there is no hard evidence.

Using your karma as an additional modifier to your Charisma could be useful.

Maybe letting a more "paragon" reputation giving you pluses with the more civilized and kind hearted factions and a more "renegade" reputation giving you more respect from the more survivalist minded factions.

Or it could set you up to be taken advantage of or be isolated depending on who you are dealing with.

It would all depend on how this was reflected in game and what differences it made to your Sole Survivor's story.

Disguises could have been done better.

Hopefully they will have better mechanics.

I agree that major actions where you are known by one side or the other should effect your reputation the most.

Part of it should come down to how much talk is being generated from either side by your actions.

If you put the fear in to a bunch of raiders with how you lead them against an Institute expedition...

Well the Institute expedition might not survive to talk about it but they might have gotten some info out via radio particularly if you are already well known.

Even if they didn't, the raiders are going to tell other raiders and that information will filter back to the Institute eventually.

Even if it doesn't anyone who is scary to raiders is going to be scary to pretty much anyone else.

This!

why not have REs based on karma,like bad ones may more often get bad (go tresure hunting then your buds want to kill you )

on the other end of the spectrum it always annoyed me getting good karma from sneak killing things.

I believe that the karma system has been scrapped and integrated into the dialogue choices that you make.

Reputation is a sorry replacement for Karma. Who we are is far more important than what others think of us, and others respond to who we are even when we have no reputation. Further, any reputation we might earn comes from who we are.

Eh, I'd argue that you just shouldn't get any sort of Karma change from it. Doesn't seem right to gain Karma from murdering folks - regardless of what they've done. Now, if murdering them as they pose an immediate threat to someone, perhaps then. Similar to saving Simms from Burke; I think that's a situation in which killing someone to immediately and directly save another person's life is worthy of karma gain.

On topic, I think Karma is important and shouldn't be removed. I like how certain companions do care about the moral character of the player character and I'm hoping that Fallout 4 locks certain companions to factions as well as karma levels.

So she is perfectly fine with blowing their head off with a shotgun but 10 seconds later starts to have a hissy fit when you 'steal' their stuff?

Again as I have already said to other people you are missing the point of what I am saying. There is a massive inconsistency between what the karma system perceives as bad and what it ignores.

As I said why is it ok to steal from their corpse but dare pick something up from a shelf then oh dear god I am a horrible person

Stealing>blowing someones head off

I prefer reputation over karma. I don't need a game to tell mw killing innocent people or in slaving them makes me a bad person(it's not hard to figure this out yourself). Reputation on the other hand deals with our groups in general see you which can have a bigger impact.

So do I, but the companions don't care about my moral character they care about my actions they think reflects my moral character. It's not like you can explain your motivations to them or the karma system. The thing with karma is that it presumes to judge your motivations through your actions and that doesn't always make a whole lotta sense. Now if, instead, there was a 'general opinion' reputation (that maybe should be invisible I dunno) that functioned exactly like karma (maybe no changes when there's no one to see tho) but without that pesky 'a cosmic force has decided I'm an [censored] and tattooed SATAN across my forehead' element I'd be much happier.

Karma isn't there to tell you whether you are being naughty or nice. Karma is there to help ensure that the world does to you as you deserve to be done to.

Debating which of karma and reputation should be used in Fallout 4 is ridiculous, because neither has any bearing on the existence or quality of the other. I would prefer not to propagate the notion that a conflict exists between karma and reputation. There is no conflict.

There are mods for it all the way back to Oblivion.

nope, still not great, and gets many things entirely opinionated.

You keep saying "blowing their heads off", but the fact is who you (or Cass) are killing is absolutely (per the game definition) going to try and kill YOU (Cass does NOT blow the heads off ANYONE in the game that is not a RED enemy). That situation is call self defense (or at LEAST self preservation). If Cass were callously murdering those not hostile towards her, your point would be valid, but as it stands, you are grandstanding to make the system simply look much worse than it actually is.

Also, you seem to completely discount just HOW abhorrent it would be in real life to loot a dead body. No doubt the very basic nature of most shooter type games trivializes and ignores it, but in Real Life many people would be disgusted by such actions. Now I get that in a scavenging environment like this game, that "morality" will change quit a bit (just like blowing the head off someone trying to kill you is "ok"), but if someone personally still thinks that stealing from a dead person is worth commenting on (I chuckled at your "hissy fit" exaggeration), why should they not comment on it?

Again, I'm not saying the system is perfect or could not be tweaked here and there, but the label of "dreadful" is not appropriate in my eyes. Just my opinion.

Wow are you really unable to read?

I said in various posts how it is weird I am not punished for looting a corpse after killing it, how the inconsistencies between looting a corpse and their off body property is odd and if anything looting the corpse would be worse I agree which actually helps my point so thanks for that

I am not making the system out to be bad, it is bad.

This is one feature the game would be better of having cut if it is not included in a much more intelligent way