In games where player decisions can cause the game to end multiple ways there seems to be a special conundrum involving early game choices: You can either design things so that the player's choices reinforce each other and eventually lock the player to one path, or you can allow one crucial choice so that they have freedom right up until the game ends. Locking them to a path might give an incentive for replaying the game, but I'm not sure that people have that much incentive to do so these days. However, allowing one crucial choice at the end risks allowing the player to invalidate all the other choices that came before. Which approach do you think is the better one? I lean in favor of making every choice count, but this can be a problem when either the player doesn't understand what they're getting themselves into or they realize the path they've gone down isn't one that they want or are capable of completing. I'm also the kind of person who likes to see all endings if a game has many, and that's not possible without completely replaying under a system where each choice reinforces the other.

Quote:

Original post by Wavinator Locking them to a path might give an incentive for replaying the game, but I'm not sure that people have that much incentive to do so these days.

It only offers replayability if there is different content available, and a significantly different gameplay experience. Many RPGs (NeverWinterNights II for example) fail miserably at this, by either forcing you to play through 90% of the same boredom-inducing story line, or by offering no real gameplay differences in player classes (i.e. you party always ends up with a mage, even if you don't choose to be one yourself).

Quote:

allowing one crucial choice at the end risks allowing the player to invalidate all the other choices that came before.

Jedi Academy (apart from the flawed light/dark-side balance), took this route, with the result that everyone takes their last save before the choice, and play through just the ending again with the opposite choice. I don't think it caused many actual replays of the game.

KOTOR is another example of how the last choice you make in the game invalidates all your other decisions.

I think it would add to replayability if the "ultimate choice" was decided for you based on your actions throughout the game. Whether or not people would care is another thing entirely. KOTOR was fun to play through again since it felt like a different game entirely (completely different abilities, different quests and different ways to complete quests), even though you could essentially ignore what you'd been doing the whole game and switch sides with the selection of one dialog option.

I think the real decision for a designer/producer to make is: "Is making my game this way cost effective? Can we get the game done on time?", or at the very least "Is this worth the cost?".

Most games with these choices put the choice at the very end simply to lower the branching required in the game. If you put a branch point in early, you need to create two different paths throughout the game. If you can make every choice count and make it implementable, I'd prefer it.

Since we're going down the Star Wars game path in comparisons, Dark Forces has the light side/dark side choice roughly 70% of the way in, but the path you take is dictated by the amount of light or dark side "points" you've accumulated in the game (mostly through choice of force powers, but also through sparing innocents). In that case, as with Jedi Academy, I didn't mind the single point of choice, because it's true to the Star Wars mythos - all the movies have a single pivotal test of character just like the games.

Most of the problems with these choices is that they're blatantly obvious. You're put in a situation where it's clear the game is giving you the option between Choice A and Choice B, and a single dialog choice affects the path of the game. I wouldn't mind if the game disguised the choice and just gave it to you seamlessly. Or if the game does give you the choice, but the difficulty of switching to a character inappropriate path is harder.

Maybe I'm just the voice of descent but I was always annoyed when after playing a game a certain way all me choices were rendered completely invalid by the fact it was only my last choice or two at the end of the game that had any influence on anything.

I’d like to see little choices have more of an impact on events or in a more story driven game multiple endings for each chapter. In a chapter type game you could unlock all diverging chapters for player once they complete a chapter. That way the player can choose what point they want to start replaying the game from along a different path rather then have to replay either the last 5 minutes or the whole game.

Quote:

Original post by TechnoGoth Maybe I'm just the voice of descent but I was always annoyed when after playing a game a certain way all me choices were rendered completely invalid by the fact it was only my last choice or two at the end of the game that had any influence on anything. I’d like to see little choices have more of an impact on events or in a more story driven game multiple endings for each chapter. In a chapter type game you could unlock all diverging chapters for player once they complete a chapter. That way the player can choose what point they want to start replaying the game from along a different path rather then have to replay either the last 5 minutes or the whole game.

Hmmm.... I really like that. It would work very well with several branches at various points during the game and would allow them to go back to that particular branch and see what happens after it. Maybe you save each branch of a chapter instead of a single chapter once. So if someone beat the game once, went back to chapter 2 and then took the other path they'd have 2 versions of chapter 3 that they could play.


What if each chapter itself was a choice? Then you could actually set up consequences and restrict the choices based on the choices the character has made up to that point. If you've made mostly good choices you have several options skewed towards the good side. Vice versa for the evil side. Maybe even have a middle ground for those who don't follow the good or evil path.

Quote:

Original post by Andruil Hmmm.... I really like that. It would work very well with several branches at various points during the game and would allow them to go back to that particular branch and see what happens after it. Maybe you save each branch of a chapter instead of a single chapter once. So if someone beat the game once, went back to chapter 2 and then took the other path they'd have 2 versions of chapter 3 that they could play. What if each chapter itself was a choice? Then you could actually set up consequences and restrict the choices based on the choices the character has made up to that point. If you've made mostly good choices you have several options skewed towards the good side. Vice versa for the evil side. Maybe even have a middle ground for those who don't follow the good or evil path.

Escape Velocity Nova has a limited form of this, in that you are occasionally given the choice to 'defect' from your current storyline into another. Given the 6 or so storylines, this gave quite a variety to replay through.

I enjoy games for the playing, not the ending. I only enjoy endings when it gives me some terrific closure to my playing. It doesn't have to be intertwined with all of my choices throughout the game, but the more, the better.

I think a few PLOT TURNING choices placed at the end of the game to make huge impacts on the ending seriously cheapens all of the REAL choices made throughout the game.

I'm usually not very interested in endings that don't relate to the way I want to play the game. For instance, if I don't enjoy playing an evil character, I don't really care what happens when that type of character finishes the game.

That game that most people liked, but didn't want to work on of mine this is what I am plannning...

You get a somewhat intro to one group and can decide to join them or not.
If you don't you get knocked out and awoken else where and you are essentially a loner until you recruit others...
if you do go with them you join them...

as described in another thread about narrative you then make choices based on how you go about accomplishing the same goal which you get by way of other story.

Around the mid point you get told a twist and can stay how you are, join another group, or join the starting group that you didn't join initially or stay with them.

at the very end what you decided before is reflected...

as the end of the loner story is either you getting beat up and getting your stuff stolen or group 1 causing you to do what they want by tricking you.

at the end of the group 1 ending you have defeated group 2 and accomplish your goal.

at the end of group 2 end you have defeated group one, but accidentally do what group 1 was trying to do through klutziness.

They all end the same way, but slightly different to reflect who you are working with...the way the loner ending is presented pretty much has the player and the character stunned as they thought they were making the right choice and would have no clue it was the end till it said so...while group 2's ending would make a lot of people mad, but might also get them to go buy the next game!

Essentially you do control what ending you get but it more reflects your key choices which should also be reflected in your game play as the story progresses as your choice at those points do reflect whether you are good or evil... and further you can just not end the game if you get far enough...as once you get everything you need to accomplish group 1's goals they can no longer do it or i might add a 4th ending so that people who don't like those other ones...if you can do something before ending 1,2,or 3 happens i will give a completely different ending but meh i don't want to do that lol

Quote:

Original post by Wavinator In games where player decisions can cause the game to end multiple ways there seems to be a special conundrum involving early game choices: You can either design things so that the player's choices reinforce each other and eventually lock the player to one path, or you can allow one crucial choice so that they have freedom right up until the game ends.

The blue player can travel the high road or the low road. In the beginning it is easy to switch between the two, but as the player travels further up/down their chosen path, switching becomes more difficult.

After a while, it may become necessary to backtrack in order to switch to the other path. Which is a bit different from being 'locked in'.

An example of 'locked in': No character re-spec allowed, your choice is final. Trouble with that is there is no backtracking.

A possible example solution: Allow negative speccing. If a level-up offers +5 skill points, give the option of pulling off up to -5 skill points as well, to allow backtracking.

That way the player is able to travel in the decision space in a more two-dimensional way.

Another example of this is Fallout-3's Karma points: I can go kill the hooker for her money, and then make up for it by helping around town -- a change in direction.

[Edited by - AngleWyrm on January 30, 2009 11:38:41 AM]