I'm quite pleased, actually, with the system of morality implemented in Dragon Age. I usually don't like karma meters that aren't intrinsic to the setting of the game (like the Humanity meter in the Vampire games), since they feel sometimes kind of arbitrary, and I usually end up disagreeing with some of their points. I prefer a much more nuanced and complex view of 'evil', especially the fact that evil can very often be subjective. What Dragon Age does, and what I hope more games adopt, is the system of consequences. Every action has consequences, depending a lot on who is watching, and there's no real 'right' path except to kill the archdemon. Whatever path you take to get there is the 'right' one, though each separate path will have its own individual consequences. The Darkspawn are quite obviously evil, but all the humans/dwarves/elves... most of them have very understandable motivations, even if their methods are quite bloody. For instance, I love the decision between Harrowmont and Bhelen. My first time through, I thought Bhelen was obviously the "wrong" choice because of how he reacts immediately after he's coronated. But when you look at Orzammar in the long term, it's hard to argue that he was worse overall than Harrowmont. Not to mention the various choices you have to make in Redcliffe, especially if you sided with the Templars in the Broken Circle quest. It makes the game feel more 'real' to me, since none of us have karma meters following us around - all we have are the consequences of our choices, and the choices others make, and having to live with them.