Do different results alter the value of choice?
I have seen multiple conversations pop up about the lack of value in the choices made in the first episode. I believe, and many of these threads support the theory, that this is related to the inevitability of the Ethan's death.
I would propose, however, that if Ethan's death were avoidable, the decisions the player made in playing him would have a lesser value. If we could do a walk-through and save Ethan, players would realize that, and they would almost invariably make the decisions that keep Ethan alive. No one would play the game in a manner that defines Ethan as a three dimensional character, utilizing their theory of mind to place themselves in the role of Ethan, and make decisions based on how they view him. Rather, Ethan would become a two-dimensional character, one who makes the decisions he does based solely on the forethought of the player. The attachment that the players, who now want to keep him alive, have too the character would not exist at all if there were a formulaic methodology of keeping him alive.
I for one know that within moments of completing the game on my first walk-through, I hopped into the community trying to see if their was a solution to keep Ethan alive, and if there had been, I would have utilized it. However, the fact that there was not a right answer, meant that I was liberated to make choices as Ethan, not for Ethan.
In that way, the death of Ethan permits the player to make choices based on the characters they want to create, not on outside influences, or the idea of right and wrong answers.
Comments
Ugh...I'm so tired of these threads...It doesn't matter which side they are on it's just a stupid argument.
We should all know that the game's choices have effect, as little as they are it still values. The thing is that it's the illusion of choice and Telltale gives you a good story but it has to tell once single story. The choices may not effect the ending but they do effect events leading to the ending.
Well, I agree with your thesis, and I'm sorry that you are tired of these threads. I was thinking it might be interesting to look at the philosophical possibilities of a game that lets you exercise theory of mind on a digital character.
Ultimately, of course, choices can't have massive effects on the storyline, as the development of the narrative becomes too massive, and too impossible. However, my theory is that the death of Ethan allows the player to interact with the game world in a way that is not possible if he survives.
As to the point of the illusion of choice, and its necessity in games, I posted a link to a great extra credit video (It is part of a 3 video arc actually) that discusses that.
Well...I thank you for being pleasant in this encounter. I do agree with this thread however and I appreciate someone actually defending Telltale through a very detailed example which Hopefully people will attempt to understand as this might solve some problems. These threads attacking Telltale for this has been happening for a while and I don't know why to be honest...Might be the new people coming in being upset that the story is linear. Again thank you for being civil and I agree with this, I was just stating my dissatisfaction with the recent influx of threads about this certain topic. I do enjoy me some Extra Credit.
In my case the "as Ethan, not for Ethan" situation didn't occure. Mostly due to time constraint on the decision making. I basically answer intuitively what I probably would do when facing the same situation given the limited options. That is actually what I love about Telltale, because I learn something about myself. It is also why I feel so enganged in the Telltale stories, because I feel involved. Would I try to make decision on behalf of someone else, I would need more time and would feel emotionally less included. So while I experienced the game differently to you, I actually agree with your understanding that the unchangeable ending freed me from the pressure to play "right" and I could simply be myself.
However I think what most people upset is what your youtube video mentions in 00:40. People are very well aware that there is only an illusion of choice. Personally I think both options the "illusion of choice" and "real choice" have something compelling in gaming, but I assume most people feel manipulated after realizing this. Maybe that is the reason why they are upset.
PS: Thanks for opening this thread. I like discussing things in a more "academic" way (as much my limited english allows).
Thank you, I was going for a more scholarly look at the issue of the value of choice. Is it the consequences of choices that matter, or the ability to choose that matters?
You bring up some fantastic points, in particular the issue of how much time we spend with a character in order to get to know that character, and make decisions from that character's mindset. Our ability to learn about ourselves from how we approach the situations though is phenomenal, and something that other forms of media are unable to achieve. I almost wonder how it would be if we knew Ethan had to die at the end from the start, if we would have been free in our decision making, as opposed to the belief that there was a correct answer. Your experience could have been different then if you know that, ultimately, your Ethan would die, leaving you free to make decisions 'as Ethan'.
Your assessment of why people may be upset is very good, and it is probable. I do not mean to suggest that people who are upset are wrong, but that I think it would be good of them to evaluate the circumstances in the same way you have, as an examination of oneself. The fact that we can project ourselves on a digital character, create a theory of mind of them, is really fascinating, and is something that I think few other experiences could have done as well. Ultimately, who we made Ethan into can tell us about ourselves, but also, we were able to craft a character, with freedom from worrying about the outcome, to be who we wanted him to be.
Another way of looking at this that might be worthwhile, and one I considered myself, is to list all of the callbacks to previous choices and what can change in the next episode preview (but that's for a different thread, I guess). Where minor lines of dialog and such alter. I ultimately haven't done so because I don't wish to clutter the forum with threads based on this and I'm not sure it'll do any good. Only reason I've replied here really is because it's not a complaint this time.
But yeah, while I doubt it'd do any good, it might show people that more things do change than in Wolf and Walking Dead Season 2. But I've not exactly played those titles all the way through since all the episodes were released, so my memory could be quite cloudy regarding them.
Anyhow, thanks for creating the thread. It makes a change to look at this from a different perspective other than 'choices don't matter, Telltale sucks' or something of that nature. If I may, I'd also share this link to go along with the extra credits link you provided, which explains why there needs to be one broad story arc, and explains how minor things change: https://www.choiceofgames.com/2011/07/by-the-numbers-how-to-write-a-long-interactive-novel-that-doesnt-suck/
Agree that it would be interesting to have some statistics about people's behavior with and without the knowledge of Ethan's inevitable death. My hypothesis is that more players would choose the non-diplomatic approach. Taking the verbal humiliation and bending the knee is regarded by most as the price for safety of your people and family. Loosing the prospect of this reward the behavior will change. In my case I didn't feel any loss of decision making. Once I was able to be myself with the hope to solve the predicament (1st playthrough) and once as myself as a character facing his certain death (2nd playthrough). I enjoyed both versions and it told me that I'm willing to be humiliated to save my loved ones even it there is just the smallest hope when someone like Ramsay (because really - when I heard his name I knew that were doomed). However I can understand that people are upset, because everyone plays games very differently. For me Telltale games is a journey to myself, while others play it in a more objective based way e.g. do not die. I think those are behavioral patterns enforced in us as most game work this way. I was upset in the beginning as well and learned to play Telltale games differently when going through TWD1 and 2 and TWAU.
Fantastic link, thank you for sharing it.
I think it would be interesting to see how callbacks affect the next episode preview, though it would be a large undertaking to really look at it all the minor dialog in the game, and how it affects the story. It also, as you suggest, likely not make a huge difference, since it would require a lot of reading on the part of the viewer.
It is interesting, because I took a very humble approach in both cases, and I think in my second play-through I was actually more humble (Though I still put soldiers on the all and picked Royland) However, it does say a lot about a person's play-style, as you suggest. An actual statistical qualitative analysis of how people play it the first time and the second time could be quite revealing.
I think that in my first play-through the biggest difference is that I didn't expect to die. It never occurred to me that the main character could die (Yeah, I know right, after all the years watching Game of Thrones). One of the things that really affected my decision making, I believe, was Telltale's expert use of emotional given off cues. Many games display emotion in their characters, primarily anger, but this is often done more through the dialog than it is through non-verbal communication, Ethan repeatedly expresses his emotional state, scared, through non-verbal cues utilized in the narrative. We of course normally pick up on these subconsciously, but things like him squeezing his fingers and playing with his hands in stressful situations really came across to me. It was truly an expert appeal to the emotional intelligence of the character. I know that, in my case, though perhaps not others, this really helped me get into the narrative and try and design the character I wanted him to be within those constraints.
Additionally, this is another fascinating part of the narrative. Not only to have digital characters with a theory of mind, but those also with a continuum of emotional expression.
Very interesting thread and kudos for the good tone!
I've played a lot of Telltale and other "choice" games before and I like them because even if the "choice" is always an illusion to some extent, the possibility of choice makes me care more about the situation. I especially like it when you avoid the Mass Effect way of having a meter represent your values. Even if a game is perhaps using such a system behind my back, I appreciate that it doesn't show me since 1) it breaks the immersion to have somebody/something immediately come and judge you, and 2) in real life there isn't such a clear cut scale of morals.
On the topic of Ethan's death I think something unique happened to me at then end of this episode. Usually, if something like a character death occurs in other games, my immediate reaction is to go back and see if it can be changed. However, for the first time I resisted this temptation since I genuinely felt that the decisions I had made best represented how I imagined Ethan's character. I also avoided going online to research how things could have turned out, because even if the outcome could have been avoided, I felt that the way the story was going was so interesting. I am intrigued to find out how this chain of events will unfold.
-nvm- I must've heard it wrong, or been misinformed by someone, idk. lol
I am sorry, I must have missed this reference, possibly due to the fact that in encountering the Purple Wedding I was not mindful of the Forrester family's existence (Before the game, who really cared who the Forresters were) Where, specifically, do they reference Ethan/s death?
The Forresters have never been mentioned on the show according to a lot of people, and only once in the books.
I think it is interesting, and a_fluffy_bunny refers to this, that everyone played the episode a little differently, and saw it in a different manner. The way you played it, accepting the consequences and being intrigued by the story, differs from the way I played it, or the way others have. Again, we keep finding things that are fascinating in this media artifact, the concept of theory of mind, emotional expression continuum, and with your comment, media ecology and how the medium affects each of us differently. The ability for illusiory choices to have real impacts in relating to a digital medium is truly fascinating.
As I mentioned, after playing the game, I immediately hopped online to see if I had caused Ethan's death. Additionally, the next day I sat down with students who study human speech and communication, and had an in-depth discussion on how mediums differ. If a character dies in ASOIAF, or in GoT, what can you do? You curse George R.R. Martin for his cruelty. But in an interactive format, when a character dies, your emotional response is different, due to the possibility of your complicity in the event.
In your case, you attached to the story, (do correct me if I am misinterpreting) and were excited to see how the fall out of Ethan's death goes, which is perhaps a more traditional approach to the medium. Whereas, I was initially concerned that I had made some sort of mistake which had gotten the Ethan I was creating killed.
My first reaction to Ethan's death was "No!!! What have I done!". I never felt this for characters in the GOT TV show. Sure I feel sadness when a character suffers, but obviously I can't blame myself. My choices (or at least the illusion of it) makes me feel responsible for it and this is why I love how Telltale is using a different medium to provide a much deeper emotional immersion, I never felt with e.g. books or movies.
Like with any other Telltale game I checked alternative paths, since I'm a curious person. And while I'm angry and sad at this particular moment that the game does not allow me to change the inevitable death of someone I care about, I realized in the retrospect - like a few days later - that I'm glad about it. Because I don't think I could bring up the strength to play with my original choices, if I had the options to save that person. The illusion of choices makes it easier for me to stay true to what I am or basically selected from the beginning. You know... temptation.
That sounds all very nice and rational. But if I would go back in time an tell my other self - which is sitting right now in front of the screen almost bursting in tears, because Lee is on the way to die and Clem will be all left alone - that it is the best way that there is no other option and it is going to be an amazing memory and experience in the future... I probably will punch that "myself from the future" right in face with my keyboard. I can understand why people might overreact and ending up posting aggressively in this forum about the freedom of choice. However in the long run, people calm down and realize how amazing the story is. If this would not be the case, nobody would continue to buy these kind of games. Actually the irrational strong emotional reaction can be regarded as a measure of the success of Telltale making their games truly immersive.
If it was me personally as lord. I would have refused his men entry and have a small number of my own follow into the hall. I would have also ordered one of the guards to apprehend my sister instead of getting any where close to someone who is completely unpredictable. Then again my family would have been kept out of the hall just for these reasons.
I watched the scene often now, with headphones also.
And no. No, they don't.
Quite the thing to say, so dramatic and so stagnant. Ethan must die to ensure a better gameplay experience. Pardon my frech but that's bullshit. If the designers were actually able to create a really broad range of outcomes and events, that game would be far more interesting, I dare to say better, than the “Ethan must die in order to play as and not for...”. But they can't do it for practical reasons I hope, so we have to deal with what they can do with the limited resources they have. The big fallacy here is the “as” and “for”, black or white, whatever you do people will play as and for or maybe just for or just as, you don't have doubts about this? Jeez. You say Ethan must die, I say Ethan must live or be murdered or commit suicide or whatever other outcome someone more creative, as someone in charge of a videogame should preferably be, may think of, in the end people will play game for them, Ethan is like their virtual pet to do as they please, killing Ethan don't ensure your “as” not one bit. #PutEthanInWalkingDead
Whether or not people immediately redo their choices is up to them, but I usually try to stick with the consequences on Telltale games.
That said, I think that Ethan's death would have bothered me a little less if the way it occurred still managed to reflect differing choices. (i.e. Trying to shut the rest of Ramsay's forces outside results in more bloodshed at the gate before they force their way in, or siding with Royland results with more physical struggle on everyone's part).
Please. Ethan was a nice introduction character, but playing with him in another ep? No thanks. Ethan's death is what moves the plot foward.
We get Asher now who will get super angry and will get his revenge.
I agree that although there is slight variations in actions and choices that you still usually arrive to the same conclusion for the most part which is a little disappointing because it doesn't feel like you achieved it the way you like. Then again they are telling their store and events won't always go the way you intended. However I will say this to Telltale who ever wrote the wolf among us, brilliant work. I love the characters especially Bigby and the choices you can make with him for what ever your reasons are is fantastic. I like to play him as a guy trying to redeem himself but falls into habits and fights his beast nature. However he also believes its up to him to manage the fables as the sheriff even if it requires difficult choices like sending fables to the farm to keep their existence safe. Although he does feel like he owes them something so he gives them alcohol or a cigarette when they ask for it. I also have him slip back into his old ways when he thinks Snow is dead and goes to far when interrogating in order to get answers. The point is that the story is by far the best and unique that they have come up with so far and I hope they make a second one very soon. I would be all over that lol. I love a good story.
It's a pointless argument. This because EVERY telltale game gives us only the illusion of choice. But for a simple, practical reason. If every choice made by the player is going to effectively alter the story, then telltale should make several games packed in one, each and every single one changing the story radically and bringing to completely different conclusions.
This is an absurdly hard work to do, for sure not for the reach of an Indie company. I don't say it would be impossible, but It'd take maybe even 10 years to make a game like that.
Giving the player choiches that only marginally alter the story, giving only different dialogue and such, allows telltale to write up only the main plot, and so give everyone the same game, but still giving the player the illusion that their actions matter.
Think about it. GoT, TWAU, TWD. Every game is based on this concept. The only difference is the final choice in TWD season 2, where the player actually change the finale. But that's because the finale is not going to have any relevance on the next TWD game (if there'll be one)
Nice to see you coming back to forums. Better than to analyse the game in a philosophical and clever way, is to have people that can add more than struggles to the comment section. It's increasingly difficult to share and listen to other people's opinion when they're all closed to half an idea. That what you said of making callbacks and analyses on previous episodes is a nice way to build predictions, and something that was probably missing during the TWD S2's hype ages. I have to admit, I've thought about making a thread in regards of this subject and others that float around my head since Iron from Ice's release, like the Achviements' patterns and lore-connection. Of course I always hesitate to create threads and topics because of my difficulty to socialize and explain my thoughts, though.
That link you've sent just make me think back when I entered this community: I had the hope that Telltale could help build and educate the minds of many story-telling enthusiasts into professional writers that, better than the majority of the video game industry's writers and Hollywood screenplayers and director, could really improve, experiment, and express their art with an intelligent perspective, and therefore at least try to extinguish the commercial-oriented projects this world continues to plague us with. But let's not deviate deeply...
People would use BioWare as argument and paragon for the "three-dimensional" choices. But that theory you have, which is great one, is an effective and logical opposer to the polemic Mass Effect trilogy ending. The DLC that BioWare later launched allowed players to understand the ending better, and to save their Commander Sheppard in one of the endings. That was a terrible fail: no one of the players that didn't understood at first ever understood later with the DLC, yet, they somehow argumented that, no matter the story's complexity in regards of your selfless behavior that is supported to be developed through the trilogy, and no matter the ending's well done or badly done writing... players would pick a ending just to save 'themselves', like all human beings. But that's the thing, ME3's ending was not about human beings. People were selfish somehow. As they are being to not let go of the character, and then lose their freedom of choice for being hostage to the possible death Ethan could have.
this thread again...
But that's because you know Ramsey from the TV-series, the books or at least the flaying scene in the game. Ethan and his family don't know him so far. For them it is just the legitimized bastard son of their new overlord. They won't imagine he's the most insane person in westeros.
The impact was the same with the first season of the Walking Dead for me. Plenty of choices eventually lead to the same outcome, but the strength of the characterization and how the different relationships responded accordingly still made your decisions feel meaningful. It's a feeling I hope they can recapture down the line.
I wish.
Actually they have a lot of hints that they're insane.
They betrayed the Forresters and the entire northern army during the RW.
Their siegel is a flayed man.
Ramsay Snow is knows by many as the man who encaged lady Hornwood and made her eat her own fingers, besides other atrocities.
That wouldn't work. I made sure his men stayed outside and even saw the gate close behind him. They still managed to appear later in the palace!
Cheese
It is kinda like this.
You drive to work.
You take a left or a right.
You encounter different things on whatever road you take.
In the end, you still go to work.
I disagree with this---> "choices can't have massive effects on the storyline, as the development of the narrative becomes too massive, and too impossible"
More games are coming out that weigh heavily on your decisions ie dragon age, mass effect trilogy. I know with DA inquisition because of the significant amount of choices no 2 gamers experience the exact same game. Like you can choose to have someone join your party and fight you and experience these events or cut his head off and have something completely different happen. I'm not saying these games are common by any means but they are out there!
You forgot the part where your head gets cut off
TellTale doesn't have the funding the games you mentioned do with their companies. They're a small company.