When I found her she was quite sick, scared, and alone. I stood over the body of her protector -- my most recent kill. She scurried across the floor, terrified. As I approached I could see the fear flashing in her eyes. Then I reached out and picked her up. She resisted, crying out and futilely batting my hand away. This poor, young creature was in need of help, and though I was warned not to, I took the chance to save her. I didn't do it for the prestige; I didn't do it for the ADAM. I did it because it felt good. Although, I certainly didn't have to....

The idea that good and evil are as simple as black and white is a myth. In reality, the "bad guy" is often so ambiguous that, depending on your perspective, he could easily be the "good guy"; and vice versa. In a game like BioShock, doing the right thing often comes down to where your conscience lies. ADAM is the substance that allows your character to upgrade his body, allowing him to add more powers and abilities. The more you harvest, the more you can do with it; so, it behooves you to harvest as much as possible when the opportunity arises. However, had I chosen to harvest all the ADAM from the Little Sister the process would have killed her. By saving her, I received less ADAM but cured her of her illness and allowed her to live freely. Of course, there's a lot more to it.... Without giving away too much of the game, I'll simply state that it becomes a morally ambiguous decision that can be summed up by stating, simply, that you're damned if you do and you're damned if you don't.

While hardly the first to do so, games like BioShock offer players a series of choices and ways to play that largely depend on the person playing them. There's no "right" or "wrong" choice; it simply comes down to what you want versus what you are willing to do. This gives players the ability to be themselves and still achieve the end goal of the game. Thus, the rise of the anti-hero -- the bad guy who saves the day.

The anti-hero plays by his own rules -- he's a rebel with a cause. He's a loose canon and smells like trouble from a mile away. He's going to get the job done -- whatever it takes -- and he's not afraid to get his hands dirty. He's the guy your mamma warned you about. He's the best and the worst in all of us, and that's what makes the anti-hero so compelling. He does what you wish you could do, and video games are all about doing what you wish you could do.

Look, I tried skateboarding on a half-pipe once -- I nearly broke my neck! In a video game, though, you don't need skill, you don't need years of training, you don't even need to own a skateboard! Video games are best when they are fun. Playing the hero, beating up the bad guys -- that's fun. But that doesn't mean games can't also be challenging, nor does it mean games can't be smart about giving you choices that make you think about what you are doing. When you stop and think about it, it only makes perfect sense to harvest every last Little Sister you come across, but you've got to consider the alternatives. The other in-game characters offer you some compelling reasons to do one or the other and it's not hard to see where they are coming from, but the game does well to stay out of it and allow you to make your own decision. There's no right or wrong, no punishment, no benefit. One way or the other, you get what you need to get the job done.

The fact that more games are coming out that offer this kind of immersion is only proof that the formula works. Players like being the anti-hero -- or, at least, they like having that choice. After all, saving the princess is good but looking like a total bad-ass while doing it is better.