(This post is going to be long so you probably won't read it. You might, however, click on the link below and watch the video. It explores the core of choices. Food for thought.)
More on choices...
Thanks to ademska, I've seen quite a handful of videos from the "Extra Credits" series. One in particular seems to deal with something that polarizes fans on both sides when it comes to DA2: choices. This video deals with the question of what exactly is a choice. Is everything we do a choice? If it were, choices would lose their appeal real fast. Here's the link for the video. Watch it, I recommend it. Then keep reading.
http://www.escapistm...ce-and-ConflictIlluminating, isn't it? It was for me since it pinned down something that has been troubling me for quite a while. In one of my earlier posts I tried to explain why special attention had been paid to this particular issue, when in DAO it wasn't much of one, or rather, people weren't so vocal about it. I'll get back to that later.
For those who didn't watch the video, here's a quick recap (more of a transcript, really).
In a game you might find:
- Autonomic reactions: These are acts such as breathing, which you don't really have any control over. Even if you tried to stop your breathing, your body will overrule you and resume its normal bodily function.
- Reactions: Such as pulling your hand away from a flame. There's an explosion nearby, your first reaction is probably to get away as fast as you can. It's not a choice, you just react. Bear with me.
- Calculations: These are decisions based solely on reason with a clear correct answer. If I can buy the same game from two places A and B and B's cheaper, I'll buy it from B.
None of the above are choices. A choice is overcoming conflict. Without conflict, there is no choice, only decisions. Conflict can arise from:
Short-term goal vs. Long-term goalLet's expand on the Mario example. Let's assume your long-term goal is to save the galaxy. Saving the galaxy is quite expensive in terms of armor, weapons, etc., so one of your short-term goals is probably going to be to raise a certain amount of money. Of course, if you want to save the galaxy, you need to stay alive. Hence, your second short-term goal. Now, raising money may put you in harm's way more often than not, thus jeopardizing not only your second short-term goal, but also your long-term goal. But, hey, more money means more options of weapons and armor that will allow you to pursue your long-term goal more efficiently, right? This is a choice. You choose when it's enough. Of course, we'd all rather have our cake and eat it too, hence the modding community. Customization brings me to the next point...
IncomparablesIncomparables pop more often than not when we talk customization, so let's talk customization. Consider "Section 8: Prejudice." In this game, as in many other FPS, you're restricted to the number of weapons you can carry, if memory serves, you can carry between two to three weapons out of an arsenal of six or more. Which one do you take? The pistol? The assault rifle? The sniper rifle? All have different perks, for instance the SR has greater accuracy and damage output but the AR also deals considerable damage in close quarters. If the game's done properly, you can approach it using different weapon combos, and we haven't even entered the realm of selecting different ammunition or mods, like in ME. Some ammo is better suited for synthetics, other for organics. Some mods give you greater stability, others dissipate heat more effectively. See? Choices.
Of course, there will always be games that force you to carry certain weapon all the time because, quite simply, you need it. I've heard this to be true of "Duke Nukem Forever," in the sense that you simply must carry a rocket launcher at all times and, given you're restricted to two weapons, you'll almost certainly go for the shotgun as the second. This leads me to another point of the video: masking calculations as incomparables.
The video mentioned WoW as a perfect example of this, and even Mike Laidlaw (was it him?) at some point complained that players in DAO ended up using the same armor for all their companions. Why? Probably because that particular armor was better than any other in the game. When you can turn an item into a set of numbers, it's easy to decide which one you'll end up using. This isn't a choice, it's a calculation, a decision based solely on reason that has a clear correct answer, remember?
Let's bring it closer to home: DA2. I'm sure people out there are already fine-tuning the perfect class-combos. Hey, maybe this is true of DAO as well. When you can create a mage with fireball spells, whirlwind, and assassinate, the perfect class-combo is that much more elusive. On the other hand, when certain abilities are restricted to a specific class, your options are reduced, and the task of turning abilities into numbers becomes so much easier. For instance, whenever I play a mage, I find myself going for pretty much the same abilities: heal, fireball, lightning bolt. It's just what the video said, you look to maximize your damage output while boosting your defense/health values. You might veer off the path a little for variety's sake, but when push comes to shove, you go for the same abilities every time.
By this point, you're probably thinking, "How does this relate to Hawke and his companions?" I'm thinking it too. But remember, choice is overcoming conflict. There is no conflict when you can safely say that A is the correct answer. There is no right answer when talking to your companions about their thoughts, opinions, and ideals, as opposed to your own. Conflict may very well arise from discussing the issue of slavery, the validity of using blood magic, or the fine line between justice and vengeance.
The more fulfilling aspect of choice, however, comes not from discussing these topics but from facing them. Would you resort to blood magic to save someone you loved? Would you free a slave if it meant jeopardizing your own mission? These choices go to the core of who you are, of who you want to be. Some of them arise from the points described above, others from carefully considering your own ethics and morals. Satisfaction comes from putting who you are as a person to the test and, sometimes, the test is enough in and of itself, without the player looking for a reward. Of course, it's always welcome.
Perhaps this is why it wasn't very difficult for me to side with the mages rather than the templars at the end of Act III. Yes, we're shown throughout the game that most mages in Kirkwall are deranged, borderline psychotic. We're also shown that templars can act like zealots, fanatics with an insatiable bloodlust. Both feed off each other and perpetuate this circle. But this isn't what sparks the conflict at the end of Act III, this is merely the backdrop, something that's already been going on for a long time. What sparks the conflict is an event, one that is just as unfair to pin on the mages as it would be to pin another one on the templars or the Chantry as a whole.
And we're coming to the crux of the matter. The reason why it's so easy for me to choose, and, yes, it's still a choice, is that the question comes down to a very simple (for me) ethical dilemma: do you hold an entire group responsible for the actions of one of its members? Well, the member isn't quite a member but you get the point. It would be more difficult for me if, say, siding with the templars would provide a quicker resolution to the conflict, or maybe more lives would be spared. My companions could serve to shed some light on these finer points, but they don't and we don't perceive a different outcome save in the manner people will see Hawke. We can conjecture away that siding with the templars is right by the city, but when dealing in intangibles, at the end of the day, no side will win the argument. I can always conjecture something up that will trump my opponent's point and he can do likewise.
But, yes, it's a choice, one that comes down to your ethics sure, but that doesn't diminish its value. Choices based on ethics can be an immensely rich field to explore, but the problem is DA2 doesn't really take advantage of that. Do other Bioware titles successfully explot this? I don't know, and this post has already gone on long enough. So, you might want to explore how many of your decisions in DA2 are really reactions and calculations, and how many are choices and what kind of choices. Just saying. Have fun!
Modifié par OdanUrr, 13 juillet 2011 - 01:17 .
Retour en haut
(though I'll prolly be signing off soon)
