Choice in video games

TheRainCoat

TheRainCoat

CAGiversary!
Feedback
3 (100%)
Most games nowadays will offer you two paths and respective incentives for choosing either one. 

As a gameplay mechanic it helps immerse you in the world and make you feel like you have an impact.

But there's something deeper I think that choice in gaming gives you, that no other art medium could offer.

Take a game like Bioshock. Avoiding spoilers, a recurring mechanic in the game is the save/sacrifice of the little sisters you encounter on your journey. You can either save them and get less adam, or sacrifice and get more. What does either choice reveal about you the person in general? Are you a heartless monster for sacrificing a little girl, or a saint for saving her?

Obviously, most people will choose not to kill a little girl in real life, regardless of whichever decision you choose. Why so? Because our brains can differentiate between reality and fiction -- at least most of us can.

But let's take a look at a game like Telltale's the Walking Dead. While avoiding all spoilers, the main

purpose of the game is to make hard decisions in life or death scenarios. Many of these choices are very realistic and have a small time window to decide. This taps into the very basic, primitive instincts of our being to show us what kind of a person we are. Many of the choices made within the game could very well be choices we'd make in real life, given the situation.

So the question is, what is the purpose of the choice mechanic? Is it just a tool for immersion, or is it something deeper, more profound and perhaps startling. Is it designed to show us our true selves and how we actually are. Going off of this definition, does this make the choice dynamic in The Walking Dead much more effective than something more arbitrary, like in Bioshock? 

Maybe this will start a discussion, or crash and burn. I don't know.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Choice in games doesn't inherently make anything more interesting. In fact, it can have the opposite effect, where it feels like the developer is duping you into things and using arbitrary or superficial choice structures to give you a false sense of control (e.g. Mass Effect 3's ending, Spec Ops's shameful attempt at guilt tripping, or Beyond: Two Souls where nothing actually matters). The Stanley Parable is a game that's whole purpose is to mock this sort of trend, and that's one I'd highly recommend playing.

I think decision based gameplay can be all sorts of wonderful, but lately it seems a lot of games implement player choice simply so they can tack it on the back of the box as a feature. Also, it doesn't necessarily mean that only choice driven games can offer introspective experiences that test your moral compass. Games like The Last of Us are on rails, but still put you in ambiguous situations that give you a good deal to ponder over after completion. 

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Wow you went into some great detail with this thread, from my own opinon I think it's all about option in gaming. I think gamers like to have the option to agree with a situation or disreguard it completely. I think the purpose of the choice system is exactly what it's called, it's giving us, the gamer the choice to do something to push the story in a different direction intended for your enjoyment, instead of just watching some cutscene and the game just tells us. (YEP!!! this is how the story is going from now on... you die at the end.) I believe that's why some of us like games with multiple endings and a choice system, cause it's a pretty cool exepirence to see what could have happened if you had taken a different route, than what you previously intended.

 
Sounds like someone just got finished playing The Stanley Parable. If not, maybe you should check it out.

Game tagline: The Stanley Parable is an exploration of story, games, and choice. Except the story doesn't matter, it might not even be a game, and if you ever actually do have a choice, well let me know how you did it.
Click to expand...
 
panzerfaust said:
Choice in games doesn't inherently make anything more interesting. In fact, it can have the opposite effect, where it feels like the developer is duping you into things and using arbitrary or superficial choice structures to give you a false sense of control (e.g. Mass Effect 3's ending, Spec Ops's shameful attempt at guilt tripping, or Beyond: Two Souls where nothing actually matters). The Stanley Parable is a game that's whole purpose is to mock this sort of trend, and that's one I'd highly recommend playing.

I think decision based gameplay can be all sorts of wonderful, but lately it seems a lot of games implement player choice simply so they can tack it on the back of the box as a feature. Also, it doesn't necessarily mean that only choice driven games can offer introspective experiences that test your moral compass. Games like The Last of Us are on rails, but still put you in ambiguous situations that give you a good deal to ponder over after completion.
Click to expand...

I agree with most of what you said, but I do think that there is something special about choice, if done right. Just because other games abuse it doesn't diminish its potential. There is introspection like you said in games like The Last of Us, but there's just something unique, more personal when you're given the reins.

 
You must log in or register to reply here.
bread's done
Back
Top