Choice is one of those underlying factors that make us all human and one of the most interesting aspects in video games. Games, unlike all other mediums are not a passive experience; they are interactive, driven by the choices the players make while playing.
To have a unique adventure there must be enough choices within the game to keep players engaged and provide possibilities for differences. Games such as the ones I called out earlier, Skyrim or Minecraft both give a vista of possibilities for player driven choice.
But what makes a choice worth while? The answer is consequence as it is how ultimately how choice X is weighed against choice Y. In Civilization for example, am I going to build this settler to expand my empire, knowing full well that I cannot do anything else for 15 turns? Or am I going to build a warrior incase that barbarian camp just a few tiles away spawns a barbarian who could capture the settler I was going to make on his way to expand my empire.
I had the excellent opportunity this year at GDC to listen to Sid Meier break down and explore his famous quote, “A game is a series of Interesting Decisions”
What he talked about at GDC is that games should have multiple levels of decision making. Snap, or reflexive decisions made in the spur of the moment, whether it is which unit should I make this turn in Civ, or which one of the five enemies who are trying to kill me to shoot first in an FPS (First Person Shooter). Then there are choices that affect the immediate future, which one of these enemies, who cannot see me yet should I eliminate to make this next engagement easier. And lastly there are long term choices that dictate the way a player ultimately enjoys their experience. Choosing a class, from a list of other classes, is a prime example of this. After making their choice the player can never reverse it.
Every game is full of these kind of choices, but not all have a significant consequence attached to them. This is what I feel is missing from a large portion of the industry. Take for Instance the Mass Effect franchise, which is one of my favorite experiences of all time. Yet the choice it strives very hard to instill in the player is diluted by having the option to, forgive the pun, “game” the system. If played in a particular way, pure paragon/pure renegade, the player can get the benefits of both choices in certain scenarios.
So it’s kind of depressing to see that the hardest choices to make in Mass Effect 3 was which one of these skill upgrades should I get? Especially since the game is all about what does the universe sacrifice in order to survive.
I feel as if just having this option obtainable by the player ruins the system. When players get to those major choice points and see a choice greyed out, they perceive that they have “failed” at the game and are unsatisfied by their experience.
So in short, choices are weighed by their consequences. Everything (In a perfect design world) should have an impact on the players experience and force them to reflect and analyze the choice they are confronted with. Only then will our interactive experiences reach a point that is truly unique and give our players an individual story.
No comments:
Post a Comment