User Avatar Image

Do choices matter?

posted by Baddestsupercec on - last edited - Viewed by 896 users
I've been wondering this. And I'm convinced they do. But I only have 1 playthrough so far so I don't know the changes. Do you guys think they do,or if they're just a scam to get people interested.
32 Comments - Linear Discussion: Classic Style
  • Wynne;755294 said:
    I agree completely.

    As good as the game was, imagining how amazing it could've been if you could've actually saved people like Carley, Doug, Mark, Ben, and Kenny makes me really sad. I mean, I know you have to lose people, but if you could only choose which ones you lose, at least to some degree...
    some people thought i'm depressed when i talked to them. they saw something botheres me, and its this game that screwed my mind
  • I also would have preferred more choices that effected the story. It's nice that the characters react differently to you but It would have been nice if your actions saved lives and cost them. I don't mean like the pick Carley or Doug moment, more like if you choose to help Lilly through out the story she wouldn't try and kill anyone (maybe just Kenny) but if you always sided with and helped Kenny kill her father she would turn against you at some point and someone/some people would get killed.
  • If the decisions in this game changed too much, telltale would not be able to tell the story that they wanted to.
  • Wynne;754380 said:
    It's just an illusion. At best, you delay deaths, you don't prevent them.

    There are conversational choices, but the real choices mean nothing in the long run. It made me sad, despite how much I appreciated the rich characterizations, the atmosphere, the visuals, the acting, and the compelling moments in this game.

    There's a lot to recommend the game, but true meaty choices with real consequences just aren't on the menu. Maybe in season 2.
    Even an illusion of a choice can make the choice matter even if only to one's self
  • In a game that is primarily about story and the relationships amongst its characters, I would say that the choices do matter a hell of a lot. When you can play a game and actually feel the blunt of the relationships and how they alter as a result of the choices you made, it definitely adds to the experience of the game.

    People on these forums have gotten into intense, intense, arguments over why certain characters are his or her friends, why they are assholes, or why they are good people. Those discussions and arguments would never exist, of at least would not be so heated, if the game never gave you an option to side with one character over the other. Having the choices actually translate into real emotion throughout the playthrough and really allow the player to reflect on just who these characters are is worthy of commendation.

    So with this particular game being about the relationships amongst its characters, yes, choices do play a pretty big deal because it alters how we look at these character as we essentially become Lee; feeling the blunt of our actions and choices. The characters may all end up in the same boat regardless of the overall choices we made, but every tense argument and moment within the game would not have been so had we not had the chance to side with other characters.

    Would Kenny's speech about Lee being his only family left have felt so emotional had the player never been given a choice of having his back? Would it have felt so good for others to tell him to go fuck himself had the game never gave a choice to help Lilly? Would Carley or Doug's death been so shocking and tragic had we never been given the choice to save one at the cost of the other and form a personable relationship with them based off our own perspective and choices? Our perspective and emotions towards these characters are fueled by the choices we were given, at least in my opinion.

    Carely still dies, Doug still dies, Ben still dies; yes that is all true, but I think it matters much more on how our relationship was with those characters more so than how they ended up. Choices don't always have to alter someone's fate to be seen as essential; relationships are just as important, especially in the Walking Dead.
  • The choices matter a lot in subtle ways. That said, what a lot of people seem to mean by "the choices don't matter" is "the choices don't completely alter the entire course of everything in the game". And there's a reason for that: They don't want to make fifty different games.

    Consider one of the early choices: Save Doug or Carley. If you save one, the other dies. That is a choice mattering. End of discussion.
  • They change the conversations, but in the end more or less we get the same results. If you choose Carley/Doug and try to blame yourself or something they still die. :-/

    It could apply to real life in a Zombie Apocalypse.

    Like the girl in Episode 3 surrounded by walkers and I'd want to save her but there's no way, she would be devoured than shooting her in the head. I just can't bring myself to shoot someone innocent in the head in such emotional games like these.

    Although, if it were GTA, I wouldn't take it too seriously but it isn't.
  • DreadMagus;753648 said:
    Oh come now, Mass Effect 1-3 gave us primary colors. What more do you want?
    This. So much this. Not to mention Bioware probably had triple the budget and time for their series. Honestly I feel choices matter just for the different relationships they create. Even if the choices didn't matter, I'm still happy with the illusion of choice which adds a awesome flavour to the game.

    Besides I think quite a few people want right and wrong choices to make. They wanted to save Carely or Doug or Larry or Ben, or keep Lilly with them and I think that's a stupid thing to expect. Firstly because TT can't make wildly branching story lines. Secondly because for example if someone could save Carely in ep 3, everyone who didn't would just go back and do it and ep 3 would miss a very shocking and emotional moment and the ep wouldn't be as good as it is. People who failed to save her would feel like they were just getting a glorified game over and would simply go back and change it.

    I hope what I just wrote made sense :P
  • There are choices to be made in this game, and they do affect the narrative within a certain scope. At the end of the day, this game is a narrative whose overall story is set with different variations in between. So yes, there's going to be a significant amount of railroading to keep the story manageable within the scope the writers had set for this story. And don't get me wrong, TTG gave us an AMAZING narrative.

    At the same time, I think a lot more choices could be included to derail the narrative so to speak. One way is to have more opportunities to compound previous choices. For example, let's look at everyone's memorable scene outside the RV. Instead of having Lee being essentially powerless despite past choices, TTG missed an opportunity to include the impact of past choices. If Lee sided with Lilly in the meat locker or in different arguments against Kenny for example, Lee could be given an opportunity to say "Lilly, I've always trusted you before and I want you to trust me this one time!" to calm the situation down thus saving the day. Others would lose a team member. From that point on, there could be multiple ways leading to a varied ending that could still be grounded on similar backgrounds (i.e. Clem kidnapping, boat hunt, etc.). Right now, what we have is a railway that makes brief divergents before converging back at certain points. I mean most choices really just mattered at specific junctures and aren't necessarily continuous.

    It's not like there's no precedent for this type of storytelling. A great example is Dragon Age Origins, where the player has so many choices that affect a great cast of different characters with deep backstories...many of them can be saved, abandoned, changed in moral beliefs, outright slaughtered etc with significant impact on the final conclusion.

    Like I said, it's not like what we have isn't great or didn't always mattered. However, I won't be opposed to more choices that CONTINUOUSLY compound on previous ones that lead to branching stories. I think it might add more opportunities for TTG.
  • They don't change the Story (much)
    BUT they do change the experience, the way people treat you is different, the way
    Clem acts and talks is (unfortunately only a little) affected like in the barn where she says:
    shit..., right lee? or if you decided not to use such words wherever you could avoid them
    she says: like manure, like when a horse plops. it's no big deal but it shows you she is affected by you. other characters are too, if you encourage ben he'll tell you (in ep4) that Clem is playing in the backyard. if you treat him like shit he'll lie to you, saying:
    she's upstairs with molly. that's just little things but there were bigger ones like wheter Kenny likes you or not, and whether you like HIM or not, if you did both the scenes in the attic will be emotional to you, the thing with the little boy and also talking about your past at the dairy. if you choose to give larry a chance you might miss him in the end because you would like to know more about him, if you didn't you don't. there are more examples i could give but i think that should be enough to prove my point.
This discussion has been closed.