About choices and consequences (spoilers, I guess)

[NotAfan]

Let me start by saying this is not particularly a rant. Going against most of the senseless haters I've been seeing around the internet, I'll say this: Season 2 is, in my opinion, much better than season one. The story is much more captivating and dark, really hairy situations. Nothing against the characters either, I feel most of them are just as good as in season 1.

With that out of the way, I want to discuss something that has bothered me since the very second game in the series: I feel that there's no real consequence to whatever choices you make. There, I said it.

The story is great, and choosing what the protagonists speak and do is a really good immersion technique. But at the end of the day, when all's said and done, your choices simply don't matter.
Characters that need to die will always die. No matter how many combinations of choices you try, their fate is sealed and that's it. It doesn't mattter who you chose to save waaaay back in episode 1. He or she will die in the same way by the hands of Lilly. It also doesn't matter how you treat her, since she will necessarily steal your van even if you always sided with her on things. Or get abandoned in the road. Either way, she's out of the picture.
Savng Ben or not at Season 1 EP4: he WILL die in episode 5, with no real payback on the whole "trusting him or not".
If Kenny went with you to save Clementine? No matter, he will disappear at some point.
Omid and Christa? No matter how you attempt to screw up, they won't die by your decisions/mistakes. They just HAVE to suvive until season 2.

Obviously, I'm not just saying that for the characters that die or not. Situations in general also apply. There's just no real "variable scenarios" to work with. The catastrophe will always happen in the same way, for the very same reasons. There's just no way for you, the player, whose the experience is supposedly tailored at, to change any circunstances through your actions. Everything is too tightly scripted, and the illusion simply falls apart the minute you begin to compare your gameplay experiences with friends, or look at an internet wiki, or simply rewind the chapter to see if something is really different.

That's not exclusive to TWD. The Wolf Among Us is pretty much the same thing.
There's just no real consequence, no matter how many choices and "He/She will remember that" you throw at me.

And I just wanted to see if other people feel the same way.

With all that said, Telltale still has my deepest respect. The stories are engaging and I want to keep playing, and I guess that's what matters most. I just wish I felt like things really changed by what I do in-game.

[RhiaRhiRhi]

I know what you mean, although I can also see why Telltale would remove long-term consequence from episodes where possible. These options we are given are generally given as short-term variations in the storyline, and it's likely due to making sure that the scope of the "potential" story does not exceed their capabilities given their schedules.

If the storyline choices had long-term effects, it would mean that they would spend time working out the scenario for each and every combination of choices that the player could make. As the number of episodes (more specifically, choices) increases, so too would the amount of "alternative" content they would have to make, which takes time.

I think having such content would be awesome, as it would greatly improve replayability, but I'd say that's likely the reason they've limited the scope of the choices the player makes.

[Sero]

They don't really affect a thing, eventually.
If you had one 50:50 decision every episode it would total in 32 different endings. Just not feasable or profitable at all.
It's like a "Magic" trick. If you see it for the first time you are amazed. But if you get behind how it works it's just cheap tricks.

[NotAfan]

Yes, I get their scope must be smaller and there's simply no freaking way they could give us multiple pathways/scenarios galore. But I'm not saying they need to go completely down that road. They can improve this aspect without having 32 endings.

For example, I think it's pretty doable (especially with their newfound praise and success) to have at least one or two out of five episodes in which your choices actually determine what specific tasks and locations you need to go through before getting to the same ending at that episode. Something like "sure, the episode will end in the same way, but maybe you'll go through a warehouse instead of a cornfield depending on what you decide to say or do". Maybe some specific (but not strictly major or necessary) plot points could be disclosed in one "route" or the other, and that information will simply be kept from you in favor of other piece of plot found in the other path. You know, little things like that, which don't necessarily transform the story into one big-ass flowchart.

Also, about the characters fate, I can live with the fact that the major ones die or live either way for the plot to move forward, but I'd welcome at least some side-characters that your decisions can affect. Sure, maybe they are not really important in the grand scheme of things, but you CAN save then so they will at least be around and make their own comments about what is going on. Or leave them for death 'cause you don't like them.
I just want to feel that if a character dies, I screwed up on my calls. Or maybe did the right thing, depending on your point of view.

And the endings don't need to be of a colossal amount. I'd be more than okay with having 2 or 3 actual major outcomes. It could be determined by the accumulation of all the big and little choices made throughout all the episodes, maybe by a "score system" that marks how you tend to handle things, which characters you most agreed with, etc. (though I guess that would make it harder to tie-in with new seasons).

Don't know if you guys agree with me.

[MorningLightMountain]

Originally posted by Funchal99:

For example, I think it's pretty doable (especially with their newfound praise and success) to have at least one or two out of five episodes in which your choices actually determine what specific tasks and locations you need to go through before getting to the same ending at that episode. Something like "sure, the episode will end in the same way, but maybe you'll go through a warehouse instead of a cornfield depending on what you decide to say or do". Maybe some specific (but not strictly major or necessary) plot points could be disclosed in one "route" or the other, and that information will simply be kept from you in favor of other piece of plot found in the other path. You know, little things like that, which don't necessarily transform the story into one big-ass flowchart.

It is highly possible for them to do this as they did it with TWAU episode three.

Originally posted by Funchal99:

And the endings don't need to be of a colossal amount. I'd be more than okay with having 2 or 3 actual major outcomes. It could be determined by the accumulation of all the big and little choices made throughout all the episodes, maybe by a "score system" that marks how you tend to handle things, which characters you most agreed with, etc. (though I guess that would make it harder to tie-in with new seasons).

Don't know if you guys agree with me.

A score system wouldn't work with the type of game this is. As despite it being restrictive there are no correct set of choices. Pete might die regardless if you go with him in episode six but that doesn't make choosing Pete an incorrect choice

[Гавносрат]

Honestly, I can't think of any game in which the player's choices truly effect the end result in any significant way. The outcome is usually the same no matter what, with the exception of a few superficial details here and there. Regardless, I enjoy the story progression and dialogue options that I can explore while I play, moreso than I care about how the game actually ends. Just my opinion.

[NotAfan]

A score system wouldn't work with the type of game this is. As despite it being restrictive there are no correct set of choices.

I don't think not having a correct set of choices is a bad thing. I actually think that makes it much more fitting with the marketing of "your experience will be different than another player". Really, with a system like this you have much more room to act your own way and don't really know what ending you will get, which feels much more fun for me. It's like "even though there's only three endings, the one you got is really the sum of your choices, not just a one or two big ones." Shin Megami Tensei IV for 3DS actually used this model. It makes you feel like every little choice you make during conversations count...and as a matter of fact they do.

Honestly, I can't think of any game in which the player's choices truly effect the end result in any significant way. The outcome is usually the same no matter what, with the exception of a few superficial details here and there.

Well, the witcher 2 did that. Not sure if anything will matter for witcher 3, but 2 had basically two routes with some quests and events actually locked depending on the stuff you did and said even within the route you chose.
Also, if you play Visual Novels they pretty much work under the fashion that you pick different paths based on a series of simple story choices. Though in all fairness, VN's are much cheaper and easier to write and develop to than what TWD proposes to be.

[SIT_ROM.exe]

The inability to influence the development or resolution of events in TWD and TWAU narratives are a major gripe of mine...

One which I have mentioned once or twice on these forums...

...

Generally, the individuals attempting to excuse the lack of any advertised agency over the narritive of TWD or TWAU, at least those which I have encountered, utilize two arguments:

...

1) "But it's really hard though..."

I can understand this position...

Making a game with a proper branching narrative becomes exponentially more difficult as more branches are added...

...

The problem is that Telltale Games has recognised that there is a considerable amount of interest in story-based games featuring choice mechanics...

However, a proper choice system would be too time-consuming, not to mention expensive, to impliment on any significant level...

So naturally, they instead decided to commit just enough effort and attention so that their game meets the minimal criteria for having an integrated choice mechanic...

...

"You can say X at juncture A, but it will only effect the next five word responce before being completely forgotten by everyone present."

"You can do X at juncture B, but it will only cause one of the supporting characters to perform a two second animation before shoving you down the correct path."

"You can save character X instead of character Y, but character X will contribute nothing of interest or passing significance to the narrative before his demise two scenes later."

"You can make either a polite or a rude gesture at Juncture C, but whichever you gesture you choose will be completely ignor- Sorry, scratch that, it will subtly 'alter the tone' of the current scene."

"None of your choices are likely to carry past the next handful of scenes and will only effect your overall experience superficially, lending very little to the illusion that this game is anything other than a straight line."

By doing this Telltale Games gets to advertise their product as being 'influenced by the player's decisions' without having to deal with the soul crushing guilt of being filthy liars...

...

2) "You do have agency. You are given plenty of choices regarding how to approach various situations, and even though you don't get any direct feedback from the game such decisions enrich and influence the intricate spiderwebs of associations and the internalized narrative you constructed in your mind..."

This is the only other argument I have encountered regarding this subject...

...

I refuse to address it for obvious reasons...

[Sero]

Originally posted by acamp1995:

2) "You do have agency. You are given plenty of choices regarding how to approach various situations, and even though you don't get any direct feedback from the game such decisions enrich and influence the intricate spiderwebs of associations and the internalized narrative you constructed in your mind..."

This is the only other argument I have encountered regarding this subject...

...

I refuse to address it for obvious reasons...

Seems like someone likes to hear himself talk. Like this:
To be responsive at this time, though I will simply say, and therefore this is a repeat of what I said previously, that which I am unable to offer in response is based on information available to make no such statement.

[NikkiButt]

The choices in these games honestly make ripples, not waves in the game. There is already a story set from beginning to end, no matter your choices, though the flavor and outcome of situations are based on how you want to act (or don't act) and that's what makes it great. The personal stories that you help shape, but you have to remember this is like those "choose your story" books, there are paths already written, we're just on for the ride with a few wheel turns to shake things up.

People often confuse this into thinking that they should have direct control and effect over the entirety of the game & it's story. I can understand feeling "cheated" but these games are meant to be enjoyed and have fun, a break from the typical of games, focusing on story, characters and getting into the world. The sooner people can see outside the box, the better they can enjoy the games set by TellTale.

[Belle Delphine Targaryen!]

I had the same view on this 'choices matter' aspect a long time ago. Choices are only temporary and its consequences are very sudden. Not enough branches in the if/else-if/else code to offer deep variety.

[-Lu-]

I dont know, they do matter - in the dialogue context, for instance. if you call the bad smell ♥♥♥♥ in episode 1 season 1, in season 2 when you knock the bottle off the shelf at the start clem will say "♥♥♥♥!.."

[MorningLightMountain]

Originally posted by Zeeth:

I dont know, they do matter - in the dialogue context, for instance. if you call the bad smell ♥♥♥♥ in episode 1 season 1, in season 2 when you knock the bottle off the shelf at the start clem will say "♥♥♥♥!.."

However on the bridge in episode two if as Lee you make an effort not to swear in front of her she still swears.

[Sero]

Originally posted by Zeeth:

I dont know, they do matter - in the dialogue context, for instance. if you call the bad smell ♥♥♥♥ in episode 1 season 1, in season 2 when you knock the bottle off the shelf at the start clem will say "♥♥♥♥!.."

I think the dialogue from Ep1 only affects the dialogue next to the cow in Ep2.

[IndigoHawk]

You lost credibility when you said people who think the second season is worse than the first are senseless haters. Don't make broad judgments against strawmen.

Season 2 is more about "feels" (give Kenny a hug, you'll pay for hitting Clem, Carver must DIE!), whereas Season 1 was more about telling a story of what happened when the world ended, how people kept or lost their humanity. You're right that season 2 has some intense emotional situations, but often they're overblown and don't make much sense as part of a story. (Kenny is mad! He's going to mindlessly bust out of the van and get shot! Oh, he was knocked over, so there was no consequence to that build up. Or OMG, Carver just threw that guy off a building! Yet no one cares and lets this psycho run the place. Or, that dog went totally crazy in an instant and now you have to kill it, even though that dog doesn't advance the plot at all or serve any purpose other than to give people feels.)

In terms of plot, only a couple important things have happened in Season 2. Clem got separated from Christa, has a new group, and got a jacket so she'll be able to travel north (which was the original plot, in case people forgot). From what I can tell, the Carver arc was a detour to get that jacket. That's nowhere near being as dark and captivating a story as the world ending and deciding what kind of person you want to be as the rest lose their humanity and you have an unexpected ward who is watching what you do. Don't confuse emotional moments with a coherent story.

As for choice, everyone dies in TWD. It's no big deal. The choice is about how you live and die, not whether you die. In Season 1, you had a lot of choices that ultimately didn't matter but did shape how you lived and how you dealt with the new reality facing humanity. In Season 2, you also have choices like that. They don't feel as important, because you don't have the type of external feedback from Season 1. In Season 1, some people initially killed or hurt people, then saw Clem watching, felt bad, and reloaded. In Season 2, no one is really watching, and if you make Clem nice one time and crazy the next, the only person who notices the inconsistency is you. So it feels like the choices don't matter as much.

Also, the choices don't matter as much because there's no real theme for this season. I think this season was supposed to be "Clem grows up" and by the end, she's supposed to have taken what Lee showed her and made it her own as she survives. Instead it's more like "Clem goes places and stuff happens", so once she goes to the next thing that happens, the last choice doesn't matter anymore.

[Malcolm]

I think these games (not clementine shes too young) should permit some degree of love interests.(I'm talking about you snow white) and maybe if you save someone they can leave for some reason but at least maybe stay alive. and come back for a certain scene later in the last episode which should have more twists and consequences being the last one. like in dragon age or mass effect