Very broad question here: What sort of hard or ugly life choice would you think would be interesting to make in a game, and what do you think would have to be true before you could feel emotionally connected to making the choice? I'm sure that responses will be all over the map, but that's fine. I'm interested in what you guys think the anatomy of a difficult choice is, and what do you think would be some difficult choices to make? I'm thinking of choices in the context of a futuristic world, but present or past are fine, too (I'll just convert[smile]).

---

I think an ever interesting choice would be opportunism versus loyalty. Imagine that a close friend has long been loyal and helpful, but you now have a chance at some opportunity that you both want. Do you sacrifice for this friend, or do you take it yourself? To make something like this work, you'd of course have to develop admiration and loyalty for an NPC; you'd also have to have be able to weigh the long term cost of your choice. Does your choice have a social impact? Does it turn your friend into an enemy, or are they understanding? Are they despondent enough to do something rash (you really have to care for this to matter)?

---

I don't know how it would work in a game, but I think another interesting choice is temptation, as in the chance to gain an advantage or something fulfilling by breaking the rules. I think for this to work you definitely need to know the chances of success versus getting caught, and the costs of getting caught. If the risks are low and the rewards high, you'll have no real emotional relation. Both need to be high. Examples I'm thinking of are stealing, cheating on a vital test, or adultery (though I admit I have NO idea how the latter could be done in a game [lol])

---

Others?

I think some choices are hard because the are irrevocable. I don't know how to make really irrevocable choices in a game, except to disable save games. but players may become frustrated and either stop playing of find other means to undo their choices.

Even if you make the situation recoverable from a gameplay point of view, some people would rather restart from the savepoint.

Temptation (high reward vs high punishment) might be a not be a good idea since the high punishment may frustrate some players.

how about high reward vs high reward. for example, getting to choose a crewmate. there are a lot of excellent choices and the player can only choose 1, and the others may end up your enemies. the problem is how to sweeten the deal while making the choices unique and balanced.

alternately, high punishment vs high punishment - I need the plans for a special ship, do I break in the facility and become an outlaw or hire the local mafia to do it but be in their debt. making the outcome a bit unclear makes the tension higher. you may suceed and breaking in the facility and gettting out but a few months later evidence related to you is found. or suddenly the mafia comes calling.

then there is the unknown. making a choice with extremely little information can be hard (specially for thinking type players who want control of the situation). A time limit and multiple potentially dangerous outcomes seems a hard choice to me. but other people may just say the game is cheezy and get mad.

[Edited by - yapposai on March 23, 2005 4:31:05 AM]

Irrevocable choices are tricky, because they seem to boost replay value, but once I've been through the beginning of the game a few times, that part seems really finite, but in the late-game, when the stakes are higher and my character represents a considerable creative investment, I'm disinclined to run risks. So it would be appropriate for the "Irrevocable Choice Tree" to thin out a little at the extremes, so that you only rarely are faced with a decision that will heavily impact your character.

Affiliations are the most dramatic such choices, I'd say. Picking a horse in the race for galactic domination will be a huge part of a charcter's identity, and impact his dealing with everything else.

Anything that relates to reputation will be good, since your fame or infamy will affect your experience in the game. The ways in which you seek justice, how you deal with other people, and the degree of opportunism you display will carve your niche in the world.

Investment of resources is another big one. Where you build your home/base, what sort of ship you fly, what kind of equipment you carry and the sort of missions you participate in all serve to open doors and burn bridges.

In the process of sculpting your character, every chip that hits the ground is a decision you've made.

How about having to choose which of your 2 companions has to make the fatal sacrifice that is the only chance that the other two of you can complete the quest? Players tend to get emotionally connected to their companions and the chance of losing one permanently could well be tough.

Quote:

Original post by Wavinator Very broad question here: What sort of hard or ugly life choice would you think would be interesting to make in a game, and what do you think would have to be true before you could feel emotionally connected to making the choice? I'm sure that responses will be all over the map, but that's fine. I'm interested in what you guys think the anatomy of a difficult choice is, and what do you think would be some difficult choices to make?

How about this. You are the hero in some game, who has a very beautiful, charming, awesome sidekick. You know, she's just like the best. After going through a long story in which the player builds on a "like" for her, you find out she is really a 'bad guy' and plans to betray you on your next mission. Your choice would be like this - either kill her ( dramatic boss battle in which she dies in the end == </3) before you go on the mission, or do the mission knowing you will be betrayed and she will reveal herself bad, thus setting you up for *very* hard fight. However, she would not die then, so there would be chance that she would be 'good' again. Of course there is always the 'twists' - things, such as you kill her just to find out she was really good. Or you don't kill her and she betryas you, in order to help you, etc... I think something like that would make for a very hard/ugly choice in a game. [smile] What do you think about that?

"paper or plastic?"

That one gets me every time.

Anatomy of a difficult choice?

Million Dollar Baby, Sophie's Choice, Godfather II, Apocalypse Now, Blade Runner, The Bridge On The River Kwai, The Treasure of the Sierra Madre, On The Waterfront, Schindler's List, To Kill A Mockingbird, Double Indemnity, High Noon, ...

Quote:

Original post by capn_midnight "paper or plastic?" That one gets me every time.

Thanks, cap'n. Cheat code will be added, just for you. (Which should do more damage?)[razz]

Quote:

Original post by LessBread Anatomy of a difficult choice? Million Dollar Baby, Sophie's Choice, Godfather II, Apocalypse Now, Blade Runner, The Bridge On The River Kwai, The Treasure of the Sierra Madre, On The Waterfront, Schindler's List, To Kill A Mockingbird, Double Indemnity, High Noon, ...

Great movie list. But I think to apply this to games you either need to make it a fixed story choice or figure out what the elements of the choice are made of. Take Blade Runner. Both Deckard and Roy Batty have a struggle with empathy. This seems to be at the core of what it means to be human. Batty's choice is very interesting because he's a combat model.

In a game, to me, Batty's choice would have to be framed like this: Forced missions of killing, with high risk and lots of meaningless death. More than any character I can think of, we'd have to represent Batty's humanity somehow, so that we as players can see the effects of all of our killing.

Then we have to open the door to escape. Then we have to inevitably force Batty (as the player) against Deckard, a foe that, on the surface, requires killing. The hard choice would be that killing Deckard would have to represent the last shred of Batty's humanity.

So the epic difficult choice: Kill Deckard and end the game as an empty shell; or show mercy, which will inevitably lead to your death, but the salvation of your soul.

Or something like that. It's a noir choice, which I don't think many gamers are yet ready to stomach...

Quote:

Original post by Wavinator Quote: Original post by capn_midnight "paper or plastic?" That one gets me every time. Thanks, cap'n. Cheat code will be added, just for you. (Which should do more damage?)[razz]

Well, on the one hand, the paper will give you a nasty cut more painful than you have ever experienced previously. On the other, the plastic bag may cling to your nostrils (but only if you're a child) and cause suffocation.

But think about it. The differences between paper and plastic are inconsequential. Look at the environmental aspect:
I choose plastic because I don't want more trees cut down to make paper,
or,
I choose paper because I don't want more florocarbons pumped into the air to make plastic.

Functionally, paper hold more in one bag, but plastic is easier to carry multiple bags.

This is what makes the decision "paper or plastic" so difficult, and it's exactly the SAME reason that makes other decisions difficult. Given two fundamentally different, yet functionally indistinguishable alternatives, you cannot decide.

What flavor of lollipop will you choose? It doesn't matter, they all taste roughly the same, like sugar, but you still can't choose.

Heads or tails? Most people choose heads, because subconciously they know that it is futile to try and distinguish between the two, therefore they choose what first comes to mind (what was first mentioned).

This extends to other situations. Take the stereotypical "diligent student" given the choice to talk to a girl or remain silent. This person knows that he will have no chance of getting to know the girl if he does not talk to her. For his goal of meeting the girl, his responsibility to himself is to talk to her, and he KNOWS this. However, he also desires to remain in a comfortable emotional state, and he knows that rejection will lead to an uncomfortable emotional state. Conflict arises, as the "nerd" must choose between responsibility and desire. He will even claim to not know what to do given the situation, but it is merely a cover story for his conflict.

Turn the situation around a little bit and label dating the girl as a desire, but maintaining his academic excellence a responsibility. Again, we see conflict. And certainly both conflicts are present, choosing between which conflict to resolve is in itself a third conflict.

How does this fit into the indistinguishable alternatives model? The subject is forced to choose between responsibility and desire. Maintaining a high GPA will make him happy, but so will making out with a hot chick. Going out with the girl will assuredly affect his grades, but focusing only on his studies is having a negative effect on his social status. The advantages and disadvanteges to both situations are equal and opposite, and are exactly two opposing forces. Two opposing forces equates to 0 net force, and therefore a lack of decision. In most cases, there is a third force (time) that inevitably leads to one choice, and so equal conflict between two choices will lead eventually to one choice.

Summary, 'cuz I ramble (of course, I'm probably just making shtuff up again):
Only one type of conflict: indistinguishable alternatives.
Conflict, in the presence of more conflict, compounds.
Conflict represents forces pushing one towards a decision.
Other forces may also exist.
The summation of these forces indicates the decision that will be made.

Are the 'ugly' choices ever the ones which are interesting to make? I'd say people feel more fullfilled if they can make snap decisions and go with gut instincts and moral precepts.


There are 3 kinds of 'ugly' choices:

- decisions where there isn't enough info to predict the results, making you afraid to make any choice and frustrated/blindfolded

- ones where there are no good options, making you feel defeated before you begin

- ones where the options are equal, such that no matter which you pick you will always think the other might have been better


OTOH the kinds of choices which are enjoyable to make are those with little or no 'opportunity cost' (if you've studied economics):

- purely aesthetic decisions where you customize something to your taste, making you feel important and artsy

- decisions where there is one obvious 'smart' choice, and making that choice makes you feel clever

- decisions where there will be obvious emotional consequences, and chosing whether a character should be happy or sad makes you feel powerful.

- decisions where there is a 'moral' choice vs. a 'greedy' choice, or alternatively a 'safe' choice vs. a 'daring' choice. People like to make choices which express their temperaments, but this kind must be implemented carefully without bias or players will feel trapped into pretending to be whatever the game designer's idea of an ideal person is.