FreshIstay wrote...
I can agree, to an extent. In terms of grand scheme yes, interpersonal character choices (companions etc.) no.
I'd still like to see a BioWare game which has characters influenced by your major choices. Hate to keep mentioning it but I loved Kenny in TWD because he'd either hate you, love you or be in-between based off your prior decisions and you always cared for him because you went through everything together.
Sylvius the Mad wrote...
*snip*
Outcomes shouldn't always be predictable from an in-character perspective.
I'd argue that if an outcome does present itself with a win-win, it should cause consequences down the line. I'll mention the werewolves situation from Origins, you're curing the werewelves and keeping the elves alive but you're effectively removing their leadership.
You "win" by achieving both ends but recieve a weaker Dalish force which should cost you later in the battle for Denerim when they're incapable of fighting under the leadership of their new leader, causing say... the Alienage to fall or something.
It's not an obvious consequence to your actions but it's one you wouldn't be surprised happens.
Wulfram wrote...
If all choices have win written all over them in different ways, then that's still an interesting choice.
It's very difficult to make a situation which all choices are wins with no/little losing in one, pragmatism / idealism and the in-betweens provide little room which everyone can win (an idealistic winning goes against the pragmatic view, for example). However, I understand the point and wouldn't mind it for a few situations provided it worked.
Celene II wrote...
So lets get this straight, i ask that they not include respec ability and people screamed at me for making them play my way
But when i say lets have ways to avoid negative consquences - no thats horrible story telling.
Point's irrelevant, one influences game-play and one influences narrative.
Celene II wrote...
So which is it, you can or you cant demand that people play your way?
People play their own way in the overly dark narrative. They can be idealistic, they just suffer the consequences for it. What's the problem? Don't like being punished for the way you play and possibly being confronted with choosing an alternative choice?
Medhia Nox wrote...
There weren't really any "deep" choices in The Walking Dead.
The very premise of it - is no different than: "You MUST defeat the Archdemon."
The consequences of the choices weren't that great but the choices were deep, they confronted the player and had you react on a split-second with your emotions at an all-time high with the possibility of doing something you'd regret.
The fact that you'd always be confronted by your decisions from other people, never allowing you to really sink into the premise that you did the "right thing" was brilliant. Players second-guessing themselves is rarely done, most writers ending up with the player's choices being the word-of-god and nobody can possibly defy it as wish-fulfillment is easier to write.
In other words, they could've done consequences better but the journey was fantastic with the player being burdened without care for their feelings.
Retour en haut
