Choices in Games

[Cognisant]

Interesting choices are the result of conflicting values, because there's no clear right or wrong, the player must decide for themself which option is superior, i.e. which value is more important to them, hence this thread, in which we can post ideas for in-game discissions (or examples we've already played) and discuss what choices we would make and why we would make them.

First up, (this came to me in a dream btw)
The player-character grows up in a small village (the start of nearly every fantasy story ever told) until the time comes for them to leave and pursue their destiny, catch is the PC's mother is a dragon trapped in human form (think Haku from Spirited Away, a manifested aspect of nature with human thoughts and desires) so the PC (thus the player) ends up having to choose between freeing this evidently wild & powerful being by destroying the village's shrine-thingy from which the enchantment holding her in human form is sourced, or leaving her captive in human form, thus protecting the village but dooming her to a life of longing for the freedom she once had.

Objectively the player has much to gain in terms of direct power if s/he frees the dragon (magical boon), but will become a villain in the eyes of the villagers and be seen as potentially dangerous (i.e. wild) by humans everywhere, making that power necessary as the choice made means there will be more enemies to contend with down the line. On the other hand keeping the dragon captive means the village will prosper, making it a far more useful location when the player returns and by betraying the dragon-mother the player negates the bias against them on account of their "tainted" heritage, meaning there will be fewer enemies for them to contend with.

The point of this is that it's an amoral discission, there's no right or wrong choice to be made, the player has to decide for themself which is the more valid value, Security & the Greater Good, or the Right To Freedom & Family Loyalty.

 

[Adamastor]

I have always thought that the matter of making decisions in games was quite delicate.

You see, if there is only one path, or at least one correct path things become pretty boring. But it's quite hard to decide or to see when there's one correct path:

If you want to be bad, then you'll choices that will make you look bad and I am assuming the game designers made things this way: you are allowed to rob the miserable NPCs you are supposed to help OR to help them indeed, something like that.

This kinda of assumption is quite dull in fact, since you are from the game creation's stage determining extremes where the players are going to be bound: there are limits to what the player has to choose and if he keep playing from a extreme to another, he is going to be put in the middle of them, what is perfectably acceptable.

IMO, this slightly different from RL (not sure why though). Anyway it is quite disgusting to see things limited in a theoretically small universe of possibilities like that. And this kind of perspective lead us to this:

Interesting choices are the result of conflicting values, because there's no clear right or wrong, the player must decide for themself which option is superior

Because players don't like to be caged (I don't at least), thus the more distant they are from their limitations, the restrictions imposed to the them while playable characters the happier they are, the more enjoyable is the experience.

IMO, interesting choices that result of the type of situation you described are a good way to induce this "freedom" condition, since you are bounding the player to questions that are morally impossible to answer, therefore there is no way to the player to fit in the small universe of possibilities (between good and bad) I've described before.

I think good games, good designed games are games that do not require the player to force itself (even unconsciously) to like the game, to oversee these type of inherent limitation that (again, IMO) spoils all of the fun, and this can be done by caging the player in a universe bigger than they could comprehend or by putting then in a ever changing environment that he could never keep track of, for being too fast paced.

*I feel I should've slept today ~.~

 

[Jennywocky]

IIMO, interesting choices that result of the type of situation you described are a good way to induce this "freedom" condition, since you are bounding the player to questions that are morally impossible to answer, therefore there is no way to the player to fit in the small universe of possibilities (between good and bad) I've described before.

That's a good way to frame it.

IOW, the player can't even game the system to conform to a preconceived notion of morality. Each choice is unique and reflects the character's nature organically or else is made through a specific reasoning process unique to that situation.

I think realistically in life the more volatile questions are the ones where two greater goods (rather than bad vs a good) are competing with each other.

 

[Cognisant]

...didn't I delete this?