I hope to see more of these next gen. There are plenty of games I've enjoyed with a false illusion of decision making like Skyrim and Mass Effect 3. One of my favorite games this gen is Mass Effect 2. That suicide mission was epic seeing all the consequences of your decisions actually play out and make a difference.
Games where choices actually matter
This topic is locked from further discussion.
Alpha Protocol had a ton of different variations as to how missions played out, who allied with you, you betrayed you, whether or not you could 'turn' or fight people and so on depending on how you acted in conversations and during missions. Hell, you could even choose to simply sign up with the villains, if you thought they were making you a better offer. I'd actually put it up there are one of the more complex RPGs of the generation, at least in terms of the roleplaying mechanics.
Meanwhile, The Witcher 1 and 2 are obvious choices for games that focus on giving meaning to your actions. Your choices in both games lead to you taking on differing positions in regards to the wars and devious events happening around you, and they particularly impacted the flow of the plot (and the player's ultimate catharsis) in The Witcher 2.
all that I can think of in questions like these is that Walking Dead is a decent decision-making game in which how would the character respond or taking a path. it's what it says on the genre
where it says something like "The decision is for you to decide."
Mass Effect trilogy, Dragon Age Origins and 2, Saints Row 3, Star Wars: The Old Republic, Final Fantasy X-2(has it to some degree) and Walking Dead are the ones that i have played with that kind of choice. Though i have heard Witcher 2 has a really deep choice system
Witcher 2 all possible outcomes,game has 16 different endings.
Prologue
SPARE ARYAN: He survives through to Chapter 3 and La Vallete Castle remains Temerian.
KILL ARYAN: La Vallete Castle becomes Nilfgaardian, surrendered by Mary Louisa La Vallete.
Chapter 1
GIVE SWORD: Hand Iorveth his sword and a nonhuman pogrom occurs in Flotsam. Margot lives. Derae dies. You can get to the barge on Iorveth's path with a prisoner farce or a frontal assault.
HELP ROCHE: Iorveth is captured and a festival occurs in Flotsam. Margot dies. Derae lives. You can only get to the barge on Iorveth's path with a frontal assault. Although this is a literal slap in the face to Iorveth, ironically helping Roche guarantees the survival of all the civilians of Flotsam besides Margot.
CHOOSE IORVETH: Abandons the Temerian cause for the Pontar Valley. Dethmold is now guaranteed to die, and Temeria will always be divided, and Henselt's invasion will automatically fail. Unlocks SAVE MOTTLE/PURSUE LOREDO
CHOOSE ROCHE: Abandon nonhumans for the Temerian cause. Vergen is guaranteed to fall, and Stennis and Loredo are now guaranteed to die.
SAVE MOTTLE: Save the elves from the tower to get sexytime with Mottle later on, and earn Iorveth's gratitude. Loredo sells Flotsam to Kaedwen.
PURSUE LOREDO: Chase Loredo into the town square and butcher him. Mottle and her friends die and Iorveth is bitter. Loredo perishes and Flotsam stays Temerian. Pursuing Loredo does kill two birds with one stone - accomplishing the objective of Roche's path while allying yourself with Iorveth.
Chapter 2
Iorveth Path
SPARE STENNIS: Stennis never faces justice and becomes King Stennis I of Aedirn, stabilizing the country and opposing Saskia's Free Pontar.
LYNCH STENNIS: Stennis dies, Aedirn collapses into anarchy, but Saskia's new nation is unopposed.
Roche Path
KILL HENSELT: The Blue Stripes get vengeance, but Kaedwen collapses into chaos. The eastern half of the North is an anarchic mess.
SPARE HENSELT: Roche is bitter, but Geralt gives him a bro pep talk and Kaedwen stays a strong Northern realm under the cured Henselt. Actually the strongest if NATALIS is chosen later on.
Chapter 3
SAVE TRISS (Iorveth): The Nilfgaardian plot is destroyed, with the death of Renuald, Shilard and their entire party. The Council and Conclave is successfully restored, assuring a strong Northern network of magic users. Temeria is partitioned or dissolved. Iorveth is horribly wounded.
GO WITH PHILIPPA: The Nilfgaardians start a witch hunt and all mages are implicated. However, Saskia establishes her authority as an unopposed Queen of the Free Pontar. Iorveth is Geralt's best bud, and Triss survives anyways.
SAVE TRISS (Roche): The Nilfgaardian plot is destroyed, with the death of Renuald, Shilard and their entire party. The Council and Conclave is successfully restored, assuring a strong Northern network of magic users. Temeria is partitioned/dissolved. Dethmold escapes, Roche takes Anais into exile. This is the only gamestate where Dethmold survives.
SAVE ANAIS: The Nilfgaardians start a witch hunt and all mages are implicated. Roche and Geralt are bros. Triss survives anyways. Dethmold dies horribly. Temeria is guaranteed to avoid dissolution. Unlocks GIVE ANAIS TO RADOVID/GIVE ANAIS TO NATALIS
GIVE ANAIS TO RADOVID: Radovid takes Temeria, whether Henselt is dead (no resistance) or alive (Henselt is extremely flummoxed). He claims he is merely holding it as a protectorate, but it essentially becomes part of his dominion, and Anais will likely never be Queen. If Adda is dead, Radovid betroths himself to Anais and closes his grip on Redania and Temeria firmly. Roche accepts this turn of affairs, and takes up the Redanian Red posthaste.
GIVE ANAIS TO NATALIS: Temeria survives independently, Anais aspires to be a Warrior Queen, and all Temeria, from Vizima to La Vallete Castle bows down to her. Roche remains a Blue Stripe.
SAVE SILE: Sile tells you Yennefer's location and departs. The Lodge retains a strong member.
LET SILE DIE: Sile dies horribly and the Lodge is terribly crippled.
SPARE SASKIA (Iorveth-Save Triss): The Lodge is strengthened, able to retain control over Saskia, with the fleeting hope of using the dagger Iorveth acquired at some future point. The realm of the Pontar Valley retains its leader, despite being influenced by the Lodge.
KILL SASKIA (Iorveth-Save Triss): The Lodge's plans are utterly wrecked, their trump card destroyed forever. However, the last dragon in the world is likely dead, and the Pontar Valley lacks a leader.
DISENCHANT SASKIA (Iorveth-Go With Philippa): Saskia is freed of the spell, the Lodge's plans ruined and their captive unshackled. The Pontar Valley stays strong and is truly free of outside control. Geralt earns the gratitude of Saskia and Iorveth alike.
SPARE DRAGON (Roche-All): The Lodge retains its weapon, whose sole purpose is to serve their bidding as a weapon of destruction given the fall of Vergen.
KILL DRAGON (Roche-All): The Lodge loses its weapon, and Kaedwen need not fear a counterattack by a vengeful Saskia on its newly conquered Lormark.
SPARE LETHO: Foltest gets no justice and Geralt breaks his promise to Roche. The School of the Viper may spring up as a powerful tool against the Wild Hunt, or Nilfgaard may try to use Letho more in the future. Letho and Geralt settle their debt of friendship and blood.
KILL LETHO: Geralt disregards Letho's perspective and delivers bloody justice for Foltest and keeps his oath to Roche. The School of the Viper is likely doomed and Nilfgaard loses a potential pawn.
One path for greatest Northern stability is as follows (with a couple *minor choices tossed in due to their relevance). Credit to Lord_Roose for promoting this path for Geralt. Note: you may have conflicting opinions about the path of most stability for the North, and we can't really gauge the true realities of this until Witcher 3 details become more clear. For the time being, I'll leave this up here - obviously it will become irrelevant once TW3 is out, as there will be choices that didn't matter or choices we couldn't anticipate mattering. But here it is all the same.
SPARE Aryan
so La Vallete stays a Northern property.
Help ROCHE
so Flotsam stays a stable, functioning town.
Side with
IORVETH
(Dethmold inevitably perishes, eliminating a rogue necromancer a danger to all around him.)
SAVE Mottle
so Kaedwen's dominion increases to include Flotsam.
SPARE Stennis
so Aedirn becomes a strong nation again.
*KILL the Nilfgaardian mages at the end of Secrets of Loc Muinne so Nilfgaard loses all 4 of its mages in the North over the course of the game: Vanhemar, Assire var Anihid, Adalbert and Cynthia.
SAVE Triss
so mages spread throughout the North in positions of power and support, boosting every realm's government.
KILL Sile
so the Lodge is crippled and causes less future chaos.
KILL Saskia
so the Lodge loses its trump card and Vergen falls back into the hands of the rightful King Stennis.
*LEAVE Iorveth to die in a Kaedweni jail so the Scoia'tael are less effective at undermining the Northern Kingdoms.
KILL Letho
so that Nilfgaard cannot use him in further endeavors, and there is nobody to resurrect the School of the Viper - for we've seen how Nilfgaard uses witchers against the North.
IN SUMMARY, we have
- a strong Redania under Radovid gaining new Temerian territory,
- a strong Kaedwen under Henselt gaining Flotsam and Temerian territory,
- a La Vallete bastion against Nilfgaardian incursion,
- a crippled Lodge and strong, loyal network of mages supporting the monarchies of the North,
- a united Aedirn under the new King Stennis I to form a bulwark in the southeast,
- a suppression of nonhuman dissent, and
- the ENTIRE Northern Nilfgaardian expeditionary force slaughtered to a man - Renuald, Shilard, Assire var Anihid, Cynthia, Adalbert, Vanhemar and all their retinue.
***not saying that this is the most SATISFYING or HAPPY ending for the characters - it stays pretty darn neutral and screws over a lot of people. I myself like siding loyally with Saskia, or restoring Anais to the Temerian throne, but
those paths leave a weaker North overall against the onslaught of the Black Ones
.
If you're looking to do another playthrough and want to characterize your Geralt in a fresh new way, try out these character archetypes as a basis.
GERALT, FREEDOM FIGHTER
: This Geralt fights for nonhumans and freedom. He is benevolent and patient.
Prologue
SPARE ARYAN: You sympathize with his cause.
GIVE SWORD: Iorveth's your bro.
CHOOSE IORVETH: Roche's vendetta is petty.
SAVE MOTTLE: For the people.
Chapter 2
LYNCH STENNIS: Aedirn is free.
Chapter 3
GO WITH PHILIPPA: Only way to save Saskia, Free Peoples' Queen.
LET SILE DIE: Sile and the Lodge seek only to control Saskia and pervert the freedom of the people.
DISENCHANT SASKIA: Duh.
SPARE LETHO: His murder of kings ultimately strengthens the freedom of Saskia's new realm and anyone like her. No reason to kill.
GERALT, WAYWARD WITCHER
: This Geralt has no time for any distractions save for his Witcher duties and romantic interests. He does not maintain allegiances and will readily kill his opponents.
Prologue
KILL ARYAN: He challenges you and you show him his foolishness.
Chapter 1
HELP ROCHE: Iorveth has given you little reason to trust him.
CHOOSE IORVETH: Seems like the fastest way to save Triss and find the Kingslayer.
PURSUE LOREDO: Can't leave any loose ends.
Chapter 2
SPARE STENNIS: A Witcher has no place inciting riots.
Chapter 3
SAVE TRISS (Iorveth): Triss is your goal, your rock, and your steadfast ally. She cannot be abandoned.
SAVE SILE: You need to resolve your quest for Yennefer. Sile's tidbit of info is worth letting her live.
KILL SASKIA (Iorveth-Save Triss): Witchers do not kill dragons, but she left you little choice.
KILL LETHO: Witchers shouldn't play politics, and if anyone's going to do it, it's going to be Geralt alone.
GERALT, TRUE TEMERIAN
: This Geralt is the savior of Vizima and friend to Foltest. He is honorable and interest in the survival of the Temerian state above all.
Prologue
SPARE ARYAN: Temeria must stay strong and united.
Chapter 1
HELP ROCHE: Iorveth is a danger to the state.
CHOOSE ROCHE: Roche is Temeria's last hope.
Chapter 2
SPARE HENSELT: Roche must not dishonor Temeria with more kingsblood.
Chapter 3
SAVE ANAIS: Last hope for Temeria's bloodline.
GIVE ANAIS TO NATALIS: Temeria must not splinter.
SAVE SILE: Dethmold was your enemy, not Sile.
SPARE DRAGON (Roche-All): The Dragon helped Aryan once, it might help him again. Aryan is wild but still a Temerian.
SPARE LETHO: Killing him will not bring Foltest back. And if Anais wishes to avenge her father one day, Letho will still be out there.
GERALT, BUTCHER OF BLAVIKEN
: This Geralt is not human but a Witcher. He is bred to be a killer, and revels in combat and violence.
Prologue
KILL ARYAN: Nobody challenges a Witcher.
Chapter 1
HELP ROCHE: Nobody commands a Witcher.
CHOOSE ROCHE: Loredo must die screaming.
Chapter 2
KILL HENSELT: Blood for blood.
Chapter 3
SAVE TRISS (Roche): The Nilfgaardians must pay.
LET SILE DIE: Nobody orders the death of a Witcher.
KILL DRAGON (Roche-All): Nothing can stop a Witcher.
KILL LETHO: All crimes end in blood.
"The Witcher hides consequences inside split second decisions about things that don’t look like game-changing moments. You just act, distracted by these big, grandiose moments where you’re forced to pick one side or the other, while all the time you’re making these small, minute to minute decisions that you’d think were just part of playing the game, but are actually causing ripples that, somewhere down the line, are going to become a tidal wave that you’re definitely not ready for."
Also,like mentioned above Walking Dead,DA:O,ME 1,2 and i will add Fahreheit/Indigo Prophecy.
Deus Ex and Deus Ex Invisible War
I'm sure we'll see more games like this, but I'm not sure how much more we can expect our choices to impact the story.
And I guess more than anything, I'm not grasping what other gamers hope to get from games with more choices: Will they really be more satisfied if they can wind up on one side or another in a war? Or do they wish for something different, like for their character to wind up being a doctor or a garbage man in a game depending upon their choices - and to have that impact the story and gameplay?
Where we stand now, games like Heavy Rain don't really let you change the story - you just decide whether you complete each crazy challenge and who ultimately pulls the trigger.
^ or if the trigger gets pulled at all, which did happen in Heavy Rain. There. Story Changed.
Anywhere the problem isn't only in the choices we make that affect the story, its in the choices we make that affect the gameplay aswell. This is something I see alot in RPGs, I actually I gave up RPGs so this is something I see alot in RPG Hybrids. You get a bunch of options but the they are all mostly the same, strategicly speaking, Ultimate offenders are Dark Souls, Final Fantasy, Bioshock Infinite and Mass Effect trilogy (which is where I 1st noticed it) !
I hope they drop the choice stuff from InFamous when they release Second Son. That was the least interesting part of the first 2 games. Cartoony super-villain Cole wasn't so much evil as he was just a peckerhead, and Hippy-Dippy "good" Cole was the worst kind of marry sue. Kudos on them using the Blue vs Red Star Wars coloring for the power set though. That was the one thing that made it worth going through the Evil Cole campaign. Palpatineing your way across the city with Arc Lightning was always a blast, even if you had to listen to Dark Cole's awful version of the VO to do it.
Geez. This sounds more negative than it should. I loved InFamous. It was one of the great surprises of this gen for me. So I'm not trashing the game here. Just the "Moral Choice" system that they put in the game. Every thing else was amazing and I still played it at least 3 times.
I've found morality systems in games to be a let down. You're always either Darth Vader, or Jesus Christ. No in between. Gaming needs more shades of gray. I also hate how if you go "evil" your characters appearance tends to become twisted and deformed. Most of the most evil characters in fiction and reality are the very images of smoothness and perfection, full of charm, ready to stab you in the back on a whim.
@Randolph said:
I've found morality systems in games to be a let down. You're always either Darth Vader, or Jesus Christ. No in between. Gaming needs more shades of gray. I also hate how if you go "evil" your characters appearance tends to become twisted and deformed. Most of the most evil characters in fiction and reality are the very images of smoothness and perfection, full of charm, ready to stab you in the back on a whim.
Demonic and deformed are obvious manifestations of 'evil', but the suave and sophisticated are better in many ways due to the contradiction between the presentation and the core.
@HipHopBeats said:
I hope to see more of these next gen. There are plenty of games I've enjoyed with a false illusion of decision making like Skyrim and Mass Effect 3. One of my favorite games this gen is Mass Effect 2. That suicide mission was epic seeing all the consequences of your decisions actually play out and make a difference.
More? so far i havent seen one single game where your choice really matter, in the end its all about how in depth did the dev decided to go.
I recall a couple N64/PS1 era strategy games where your choices could send you on entirely different missions and campaigns. You don't really see stuff like that in most modern games with choices nowadays because that would require doubling the content in the game. Most devs don't have the budget and time to pull off something that ambitious, especially given how expensive games are getting to make. This doesn't mean that making a game today where the player's input actually makes a difference is impossible, but it's probably not going to carry the weight that the game wants you to believe it does.
@muthsera666 said:
@Randolph said:
I've found morality systems in games to be a let down. You're always either Darth Vader, or Jesus Christ. No in between. Gaming needs more shades of gray. I also hate how if you go "evil" your characters appearance tends to become twisted and deformed. Most of the most evil characters in fiction and reality are the very images of smoothness and perfection, full of charm, ready to stab you in the back on a whim.
Demonic and deformed are obvious manifestations of 'evil', but the suave and sophisticated are better in many ways due to the contradiction between the presentation and the core.
i don't really mind that in games to be honest.
@Planeforger said:
Alpha Protocol had a ton of different variations as to how missions played out, who allied with you, you betrayed you, whether or not you could 'turn' or fight people and so on depending on how you acted in conversations and during missions. Hell, you could even choose to simply sign up with the villains, if you thought they were making you a better offer. I'd actually put it up there are one of the more complex RPGs of the generation, at least in terms of the roleplaying mechanics.
Meanwhile, The Witcher 1 and 2 are obvious choices for games that focus on giving meaning to your actions. Your choices in both games lead to you taking on differing positions in regards to the wars and devious events happening around you, and they particularly impacted the flow of the plot (and the player's ultimate catharsis) in The Witcher 2.
AP is brilliant. Very few games do I go back to see all the different endings, because usually all that changes is maybe a couple of little things at the end or something. AP is constantly rearranging itself around your choices and letting those choices resonate until the very finale of the game. Games like Walking Dead and Mass Effect box out choices from the rest of the game, giving you some immediate sense of impact while all the while limiting the actual reach of that choice.
I think AP's dev cycle tells us something about how difficult it is to do what they did with the game. Much easier to do something like WD or ME because you don't have to rescript entire sections of the game for every possible choice the player can make. Logistical limitations are a huge barrier to choice in gaming and I don't see next gen consoles making this process any easier, so I would expect the sos.
@Randolph: I think sleeping dogs tried to illustrate that in some way between the cop and triad bar that it wasnt so much about being good or bad but maintaining that you're neither, just whatever necessary to get the job done.
@platinumking320 said:
@Randolph: I think sleeping dogs tried to illustrate that in some way between the cop and triad bar that it wasnt so much about being good or bad but maintaining that you're neither, just whatever necessary to get the job done.
Well, what you´re talking about there isent really choices in game that matters.
In sleeping dogs you had to do the missions to progress.
Let see FF9 change you character base on the gear and skill you choose. A good number of JRPG.
Neverwinter Night can change a good deal with what skills you picks. Too bad many current WRPG have been removing the choices that I can make.
Of you truly want to get into it most current game have some level of choice that affect you.
@The_Last_Ride said:
@muthsera666 said:
@Randolph said:
I've found morality systems in games to be a let down. You're always either Darth Vader, or Jesus Christ. No in between. Gaming needs more shades of gray. I also hate how if you go "evil" your characters appearance tends to become twisted and deformed. Most of the most evil characters in fiction and reality are the very images of smoothness and perfection, full of charm, ready to stab you in the back on a whim.
Demonic and deformed are obvious manifestations of 'evil', but the suave and sophisticated are better in many ways due to the contradiction between the presentation and the core.
i don't really mind that in games to be honest.
In some games it is definitely awesome. I didn't mean to imply that that path in particular should never be taken. However, it depends on the type of game and what the developer is trying to do. Calm and methodical evil is an extremely attractive choice for certain situations, but being and obviously evil presence is a perfect fit for some games.
@Lulu_Lulu said:
@ wiouds
I don't think those choices mattered.
Those are the one that matter the most since they affect the game play long term.
If you are talking about the pick a path type choices then they are very limited and does not matter that much out side the little change they do. To go along with this is the choose of how to deal with a problem. I choose to attack the enemies from a distant in the bunk will change the game for that engagement alone.
If you are talking about story change then they are not that important. It many times they seem to weaken the story as well.
@wiouds said:
@Lulu_Lulu said:
@ wiouds
I don't think those choices mattered.
Those are the one that matter the most since they affect the game play long term.
If you are talking about the pick a path type choices then they are very limited and does not matter that much out side the little change they do. To go along with this is the choose of how to deal with a problem. I choose to attack the enemies from a distant in the bunk will change the game for that engagement alone.
If you are talking about story change then they are not that important. It many times they seem to weaken the story as well.
I think he's looking at choices that only effect how you go about playing the game, not the choices in the narrative. Two entirely different conversations.
Have you tried KOTOR 2 (PC version)? The game actually made me think about my choices before choosing because of one particular character and her opinions on just about everything. Witcher 1 & Witcher 2 are obvious choices. I also heard Planecape is great at this aswell, I never played it but I've heard a lot of good things about it.
Binary Domain. You get different endings depending on who has a high friendship meter. Your decisions help fill or decrease that meter for each character.
I was actually just thinking about this today, the very first game with "choice" I was exposed to was Fable but having never completed it I'm not sure if it stacks up to the other obvious ones such as the Bethesda RPGs, and the Witcher games. I really thought making choices in the GTA IV was interesting and would have really liked to see more of that implemented into the new one. I think Bethesda does it best with you can create your characters appearance and then allow his/her actions dictate the type of person they are. Skyrim lacked the Karma or Fame/Infamy of the other titles which I think added a better element of realism to choosing good or bad deeds. Hero's can go unnoticed and villain's can be secretive.
@muthsera666 said:
@wiouds said:
@Lulu_Lulu said:
@ wiouds
I don't think those choices mattered.
Those are the one that matter the most since they affect the game play long term.
If you are talking about the pick a path type choices then they are very limited and does not matter that much out side the little change they do. To go along with this is the choose of how to deal with a problem. I choose to attack the enemies from a distant in the bunk will change the game for that engagement alone.
If you are talking about story change then they are not that important. It many times they seem to weaken the story as well.
I think he's looking at choices that only effect how you go about playing the game, not the choices in the narrative. Two entirely different conversations.
I pick games that you have choices that affect the entire rest of the game and just just a part of the game.
I want to see more games with player choice as well. That always makes thing more interesting for me and helps pull me into the game world more.
Alpha Protocol is the prime example of choices in gaming done right this gen. An underrated gem.
@GodModeEnabled said:
I want to see more games with player choice as well. That always makes thing more interesting for me and helps pull me into the game world more.
Alpha Protocol is the prime example of choices in gaming done right this gen. An underrated gem.
I am getting sick of those "choices" . Truth to be told there are not that important to the game and it seem that many game developer are using them to be lazy and not work on the real choices.
For example, Mass Effect 2 all the "choices" involved in the suicide mission have little affect on the game.There was only two choice that matter in the game. The extra weapon which is limit the amount it change the game. The choice of class is the only choice that really matter but the "level up" is so limit that you do not get a meaning choices from it.
Please Log In to post.
Log in to comment