Our Properties: Gamasutra GameCareerGuide IndieGames Indie Royale GDC IGF Game Developer Magazine GAO
My Message close
Latest News
spacer View All spacer
 
February 10, 2012
 
What drives the developers of Unity?
 
Analyst questions validity of unusual January NPD results [14]
 
Skyrim wins big at 15th Annual Interactive Achievement Awards
spacer
Latest Features
spacer View All spacer
 
February 10, 2012
 
arrow Virtual Goods - An Excerpt from Social Game Design: Monetization Methods and Mechanics
 
arrow Principles of an Indie Game Bottom Feeder [21]
 
arrow Postmortem: CyberConnect 2's Solatorobo: Red the Hunter [1]
spacer
Latest Jobs
spacer View All     Post a Job     RSS spacer
 
February 10, 2012
 
Rockstar San Diego
Gameplay Programmer
 
EEDAR
Business Analyst
 
Rockstar San Diego
Tools Programmer
 
Irrational Games
Systems Designer
 
CCP - North America
Sr. Tech Artist
 
CCP - North America
Lead Character Artist
spacer
Blogs

  inFAMOUS and the Illusion of Choice
by Francisco Souki on 09/06/09 08:28:00 pm   Expert Blogs   Featured Blogs
11 comments Share on Twitter Share on Facebook RSS
 
 
  Posted 09/06/09 08:28:00 pm
 

This piece will spoil a big part of inFAMOUS and even a bit of Bioshock So be warned. SPOILERS below.

The general consensus is that it’s healthy to stay away from the notepad when hotheaded, inflamed or when in any other situation when reason might be compromised. But for games, and storytelling, I feel like the exact opposite may be best.

I have just finished playing through inFAMOUS and I’m ready to speak my mind - hot as it might be.

inFAMOUS is a game about freedom. The player is free to roam the world as they please, free to kill or help civilians, free to climb on buildings and drop from any height, free to spend experience points as they wish and free to choose which missions to complete and in what order. One would think, then, that inFAMOUS is a game about freedom of choice. Well, one would think wrong.

Let’s go back in time briefly and consider Bioshock for a bit, as it shares quite a bit of elements with inFAMOUS. Bioshock required the player repeatedly to choose whether to slain or rescue possessed little girls called Little Sisters. Killing them meant more XP and saving them meant less XP but some gifts along the way and, more importantly, peace of mind.

But then it all turned out to be false: the XP vs. Time curve showed that it really did not matter whether the player saved the girls or not, as the XP gain would even out with time. Bioshock made a great job of making the player believe that their choice mattered, when it really only meant a different ending. Bioshock gave the Illusion of Choice.

Back to inFAMOUS then, where choice seems to matter a lot more. They did what Bioshock should have done and made the difference between good and evil behavior more evident. They even created special reflection moments to prompt the player to really think about their choice.

They dynamically changed the art style a bit to reflect player choices, and restricted powers depending on player behavior. This is all nice and pretty, and motivates the player to choose a moral path, stick to it and be proud. But it doesn’t do much for the essence of the game. It’s too game-mechanicky. It feels shallow. Until the unexpected happens.

Suddenly there’s the character, the player avatar, standing between two buildings rigged with bombs. One of the buildings holds six hostages, all doctors; the other, the character’s girlfriend. The player must choose: save the doctors or save the girl? I must say I felt completely shocked by this - never has the fate of a bunch of pixels weighted as much in my hands. I stepped toward one of the buildings… screw the doctors, I love that girl.

I made a choice that I wasn’t entirely proud of, but it was MY choice. The game felt so much closer to me know, I had imprinted myself into it. It had let me imprint myself into it. Except that it had not. A cut-scene explained that I had not really saved my girlfriend, that I had been tricked because she was among the doctors. OK, I thought, I’ll replay the mission and save those guys then, and save her in the process. Hmmm, well no, not really because this time you were not tricked, see? Basically, she was going to die either way.

And I must say that sucks. That moment right there threw every other choice I had made into the dumpster. For a moment, it felt as if all the small choices were in preparation for this big, truly meaningful choice. And when that moment shattered, so did all those other, small moments.

When I reached the ending, I had very low expectations. The ending was surprising, tying the story in a cool, unexpected way. But again, it was identical regardless of any choice the player had made during the game.

In the game’s defense I will say that it could be interpreted in different ways, but the words and the imagery are the same. The only reward, the only difference comes after the credits, when the character makes a final statement that sums up the player’s behavior and how it has affected the world.

Every choice made dies with the game, with the virtual world. When we power the game off, the choices made lose all meaning, they are turned off along with the game. We are never left to deal with the consequences of our actions, never allowed to really care about our choices. We are given the Illusion of Choice. And when the illusion breaks we see the game for the piece of plastic that it is, and go to bed so we may forget about it.

 
 
Comments

Stephen Northcott
profile image
Oh, I so agree with you about that particular "choice".
I actually thought I had misunderstood something, because I was sure I had chosen the option to save her.... and yet all of a sudden I was thrust into a scene that meant (to me anyway) that I had made the other choice.... by mistake.... or something!!

I was not playing alone, and we were all as confused by that scene as each other.
I am glad it was not just us being dense!

The rest of the game is a blast though. So overall I forgive them.

And come one, you didn't really expect your choices to matter, did you? ;)

Jamie Mann
profile image
The problem here is that the game changed the rules without informing the player. Which is either unfair or cheating: either way, players who realise this is happening are liable to walk away from the game.

If an event is central to the plot of the game, then action it in a way which means the player was clearly unable to intervene - via a cut-scene or an in-game event (e.g. collapsed wall blocking access, bad guy with an override, etc). Otherwise, sooner or later players will discover that they're being played for fools...

Tiago Costa
profile image
I am loving this game, I'm loving how a game can be hard (even in normal difficulty) and still keeps begging to be played, its great to feel this.

Now for the cut scene in question, I knew, as soon as I got there, that she would die no matter my choice (I think that this was what the game designers wanted) and it was a "choice" made from despair, with no choice at all.
The game let's you choose what you become when power is given to you, not what happens around you, you (as in real life) matter little for the outcome of the world, but may make the difference for some people around you.

I don't know why but this game its perhaps the first game in a while that makes me feel bad inside when I kill some innocent transients during in a fight with reapers/dust men/first sons. When a game makes me feel bad when blowing a representation of a person because I choose to be "good" in it, I must say that it has hit the bullseye.

But that's just me...

lee cummings
profile image
I didn't have any issue with this when I played through the game, quite simply because I never went back and tried to make a different choice. As soon as you do that you've annihilated you own suspension of disbelief - and whatever comes of that shouldn't be held against the development team.

Derek Bentham
profile image
I like having the choice to choose one path or another. Not a moral path but a path on a map. Like in castlevania 3 for instance. Go down one path, and you see different levels and face unique challenges. Nice, simple, clear-cut. When I've finished the game, if I enjoyed it enough, I'll replay and go down the alternate path. Sometimes I think, some games are trying too hard to give the player choice. For instance, in Mass Effect, in the beginning, I was thoughtful with my choices during the "dialogue branches". Before long I just grew irritated, and did not care. If I can't possibly know the outcome of my choice, my choice might as well be random anyway. Personally, I think linearity is underrated. If it's linear and good, I don't have a problem with it.

JB Vorderkunz
profile image
I kinda disagree that the Xp/time curve for BioShock creates an "illusion" of choice. If one alternative is clearly better than the other, then players who wish to create the most powerful avatar have NO choice - there is only one optimization. But if their choices have equitable outcomes, then it is entirely about morality and ethical stance - it is in that sense an actual decision: even the "power gamer" must make an ethical statement.

Frank Forrestall
profile image
Interesting dilemma. I agree that it's pretty weak to present a choice to a player and yet have no meaningful concequence to that choice.

Bioshock's choice was pretty 'cosmetic', do you want to play a sterotypical 'bad guy' or a stereotypical 'good guy'? It came down to what sort of mood I was in rather than tapping into any complex psychological question.

Fallout 3 DLC 'The Pitt' presented a choice that would completely alter the third act of the game depending on what you chose. The choice itself was deliberately ambiguous in its 'good/bad' rationale and demanded some consideration in the social/political context of the world they created. In essence the choice itself was a statement by the game writer that could be summed up as: "choices of great magnitude are never black and white"; which in itself is a powerful and universal statement.

Before confronting gamers with a choice in a game, the developers may want to ask the question "what is the statement (or substance) of our choice?"

I feel another blog coming on...

Paul Bland
profile image

Lance Rund
profile image
I would not agree that all outcomes need to be "equal" in choices offered. They need only be different, and each choice must offer a unique advantage (along with whatever disadvantages). As long as there is a substantial "you can only do X if you choose Y", it won't matter if one path or another is the most powerful. There will be replay value, and people will try the alternate paths.

One thing which has been emphasized in a large number of articles is the "morality" axis of choices. That's a bit limiting... when the morality of a choice is ambiguous, or the setting itself is an exercise in moral ambiguity, there are other axes to base the decision on. "Power now/power later", "ranged attack/melee attack", "best soloist/best with companion NPC", "loved/feared" etc... none of these need have much in the way of moral factors.

Also, let's not undervalue "mere" cosmetic differences. Choices which make your character more beautiful/more badass, steampunkish/high-fantasy or whatever do carry a lot of weight, especially if the game designer is doing their best to get the player to identify with the protagonist. People will sometimes trade DPS for "'Nando, you look mahhhhvelous".

jacob haug
profile image
Games with stories seem to fall into one of two camps. Enactment stories where you essentially guide your hero through the game not so much making narrative choices, it's more like being along for the ride/ being the symbolic energy that enables him/her to succeed, for the most part choices in these games don't exist at all or are completely superficial.

In the other camp are games that offer choice after choice after choice and, as is so popular at the moment, being very explicit in their advertisements that these choices matter and have consequences. Infamous clearly falls into this group. What seems to be the problem with this fake choice is that it actually belongs in the other camp's games. If every bit of information relating to the game you receive is built on this theme of meaningful choice of course some people are going to be a little dejected. It doesn't fit with what you've been promised. Now I'm not saying that it is impossible to do this sort of thing just that it needs to be worked into the larger game thematically so it makes sense. It can sometimes be cool to shock and surprise your audience, but unless these "shocks" and "surprises" are setup at least a little they aren't nearly as effective.

All this talk of choices has made me think of one of my favorite ones that could be seen a strange diametric opposite to the one in Infamous.

In Deus Ex there was a certain point in the game where there are a bunch of goons outside the door, you and your brother are trapped and he elects to sacrifice himself; fighting them off as you make you escape out the window. The first time I played through it seemed obvious that my only option was to run and I left my brother to his fate, the game did a great job instilling in me the same emotions that my character felt- I had to run for my life I had no choice at all! the real Illusion was that I had no choice

My second round through the game I felt like playing around to see if I could possibly save him, though I didn't seriously believe i could. To my shock and astonishment after fighting for my life using everything I had and thinking as tactically as I could; my brother was alive, not just alive but talking to me - continuing the story fluently.

Lots of games treat choice with a brute hand, making everyone of them explicit and in your face. Always one or the other, a pause to let you decide and then with the black and white decision made the obvious ensues. But what about all the times that you don't feel that you have a choice. Often the most important decisions people make is when they are not prompted to make a choice at all. The real choice is between inaction and action. Potential energy and kinetic energy. Allowing some yourself to be pushed and guided or pushing back and making a stand.

Wow this post is kind of a mess. Sorry everyone ;)

Ken Kinnison
profile image
I think Fable 2 is worth noting again though, even though some people hated the dog dying, they actually did find a way to make it a real choice with real consequences (but why was the evil prize so lame?). Something most games don't seem to give (even within the game most choices feel shallow). Effectively, most choices in games seem to serve merely for a different ending.
On another side note, although I tend to play 'the good guy' or at worst the 'somewhat chaotic neutral guy' I find it interesting most games make it unrewarding or simply harder to be evil. You might gain a little extra money or items, but ultimately with everyone hunting you (ala morrowind or fable) what good is it?
The counterweight is the 'nullifying of the choice by having the exact same rewards for light/dark. You can kill the ewok or save his village... but either you'll get the 600 credits he's carrying, or he'll give you it and a reward.
Contrast it further with the games that have powers... that can only be accessed by being extremely evil/good... so screw being chaotic neutral.
And how do we usually get to chaotic neutral? Is it by making a third (or nth) choice? No... largely its because I'm forced (based on reward) to go from killing an ewok to helping a twi'lek dancer find her long lost brother, to helping a wookie find inner peace, to randomly selling 6 other wookies into slavery.
Half the time the 'evil' choice doesn't make sense even if the character is mouth frothingling evil... in Fable 2 (again)... why the heck would I jack up prices on houses for a quick buck... when it just kills the economy? Why the heck would I take the moola (which is a paltry sum if you do ANYTHING money building) When the dog is emminently more useful?

From a designer perspective... I simply want more possible outcomes.... I know thats more difficult... but can anyone think of cases where its been done? (I like that deus ex didn't hit you over the head with its choices...)
Especially since most instances of choice are staged breakpoints I do end up wondering...

In any case... I do agree to an extent with Derek.
Linearity can be underrated. But one can also like about games with choice- but is this all that there is to that?


none
 
Comment:
 




 
UBM Techweb
Game Network
Game Developers Conference | GDC Europe | GDC Online | GDC China | Gamasutra | Game Developer Magazine | Game Advertising Online
Game Career Guide | Independent Games Festival | Indie Royale | IndieGames

Other UBM TechWeb Networks
Business Technology | Business Technology Events | Telecommunications & Communications Providers

Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Contact Us | Copyright © UBM TechWeb, All Rights Reserved.