Why does Awakening give you multiple choices if they all lead to the same results?

[Ϲharlie]

Denam was a Lord too, coincidentally enough.

Well... not quite. He only becomes a lord under certain circumstances, and that's not exactly an ideal situation.

[RJWalker]

I didn't exactly say Mass Effect's style was bad. But almost all of the minor choices are illusions. And yes, there are those massive choices that do matter. Except in the endings lol. Nothing matters there except for what color you like best.

[IceBrand]

I didn't exactly say Mass Effect's style was bad. But almost all of the minor choices are illusions. And yes, there are those massive choices that do matter. Except in the endings lol. Nothing matters there except for what color you like best.

" Nothing matters there except for what color you like best."

I laughed harder than I should have there. So simple, yet so genius.

[sirmola]

THe reason that ilusiary choice is so common is that it works if done well (another example is skyrim, which has a main quest which unfolds in the same way no matter what choices you make in dialog or who you kill, although side quests usualy don't). However, the key word here is illushion. If the illushion is not convincing or well constructed, You get annoyed. Awakening's choices are clumsly done, so they are annoying.

[Airship Canon]

There was once a solid explanation on why that simply made sense:

[i do believe it was from Westbrick <The Traitor>, but w/e.]

Anyways, a huge part of the game is that you can't fight fate vs "I'm changing fate".

No choice you make matters until the final act [the very last choice is the only one that matters, as it determines the ending].

Which serves as a stylistic culmination to that theme-- you HAVEN'T been able to fight fate/unwrite what's already written until the very end, where you have successfully defied fate and broke off from the predestined end. (This doesn't cover the promise, but that's something that wouldn't have had an impact anyway).

[Anacybele]

To be fair when you're on your first play through, both of the two option leads to the same fate. It's only on the second trip this changes.

Really? I thought that in the first playthrough, Pelleas could survive, but he would only join your party on the second playthrough. Guess I was wrong. lol

[sirmola]

There was once a solid explanation on why that simply made sense:

[i do believe it was from Westbrick <The Traitor>, but w/e.]

Anyways, a huge part of the game is that you can't fight fate vs "I'm changing fate".

No choice you make matters until the final act [the very last choice is the only one that matters, as it determines the ending].

Which serves as a stylistic culmination to that theme-- you HAVEN'T been able to fight fate/unwrite what's already written until the very end, where you have successfully defied fate and broke off from the predestined end. (This doesn't cover the promise, but that's something that wouldn't have had an impact anyway).

I'd agree if the actual writing wasn't so ham fisted. As it is, it feels incredibly cheap.

[Ownagepuffs]

I'd agree if the actual writing wasn't so ham fisted. As it is, it feels incredibly cheap.

This. I want to give Awakening credit in some areas but jeez the story is such a clusterfuck that I find it hard to believe they were being any sort of clever at any point of the game.

[NoNameAtAll]

Just because it as has been done before does not excuse it from being bad.

I only said that to prove Awakening is far from the only offender. Other fantastic games do the same thing.

[Skynstein]

It's a thing that works for the first time but loses relevance in a second playthrough.

[Red Falcon]

Certain results occur because certain things are inevitable. Events are going to happen, but it's how you deal with them that matters. And those choices reflect on those NPCs around you. It's an experience, which emotions are invested into. The decision making process develops you as a player and your avatar as a character; not because of the outcome, but because of the path you chose. The outcome is merely consequential. If you skip the cutscenes, you're cutting and missing out on that experience and moving through the game in a really lazy unprogressive way.

Here's an analogy...

You and a friend are sharing a box of chocolates. You both feast on the box until only one chocolate is left. Two options are available; offer the friend the last chocolate, or take the chocolate for yourself. Either way, before you can finish the sentence, the friend reaches into the box and pounces on the last chocolate. They eat the chocolate. Now you never got to have the last chocolate, but there were two paths laid out in front of you. Two different choices which shape who you are. You gained an experience. And that's what matters. Try not to get so hung up about the chocolate!!

Edited August 7, 2014 by Red Falcon

[Shadow Knight]

I love Awakening but I won't ignore its flaws. While the story has some high points and excellent ideas there are definitely several missed opportunities. When it comes to illusionary choice I think it really comes down to how connected you are with the characters. For example when confronted by Lucina in every one of my playthroughs I chose the option that makes tell her to screw destiny. I never considered the other option and even though I knew that the outcome was different I didn't care bc I wanted my character to be a hero who never gave up. But I can see how some ppl may hav tried it out of curiosity and been disappointed. What if, to spice things up, you had to make a choice between certain partners. For example, if you chose not to submit to Lucina and lacked a certain social rank you would be forced to fight her to the death with the loser being eliminated from the team. Or perhaps an event where if you achieved A ranks with Basilio and Flavia you would hav to choose which one to support if Basilio decided to try and usurp her position of Khan. However, while the dev team definitely screwed this up, they never really delved into the branching story narrative pathways influenced by story choice mechanics before. The usual branching story aspects are based on gameplay outcomes like failing to recruit a certain character, a character's death, or pairing up characters. Awakening's story choice mechanic is definitely a disappointment, but I do think this bodes well for the future bc the ending choice was still great in my opinion and hopefully if the mechanic is implemented in future games they will improve it.

[Topazd]

I'm not against dialogue options affecting nothing more than just the dialogue. In Awakening all the choices were given in way too significant situations, when they didn't really affect anything on the grander scale, though. If there were more dialogue options in less turbulent scenes, it might not have seemed as pretentious as it did now.

[sirmola]

I'm not against dialogue options affecting nothing more than just the dialogue. In Awakening all the choices were given in way too significant situations, when they didn't really affect anything on the grander scale, though. If there were more dialogue options in less turbulent scenes, it might not have seemed as pretentious as it did now.

Skyrim does an excellent job of this as far as the main story goes. You have so many choices that mean something in secondary dialog that you don't really notice that all options during the important scenes go the same way and set you on the same path(certian other quests give you vastly more choice). If awakening had had choices like this during interstitial scenes, But not main ones, that would have worked much better. (heck, giving you choices during supports that changed which path you took to hooking up would have been an excellent idea, given that support dialog is not supposed to affect anything.)

[The Geek]

Maybe they tested with fake player choices to see if they should do real ones?

Or maybe I'm an optimist.

[Czar_Yoshi]

You gained an experience. And that's what matters.

The Avatar doesn't though.

[MRDRHAWK]

yeah but who cares about meaningful development of an otherwise bland character

when you can have more wish fulfillment!

[Passionfruit Cappuccino]

Yea, I too was having a tough time deciding on Emmeryn's fate at first, but then i realised that it didnt even matter, which kinda disappointed me (even tho i "chose" to sacrifice her). I suppose that the illusion of choce makes the game seem more appealing to the player at first

[Ownagepuffs]

yeah but who cares about meaningful development of an otherwise bland character

when you can have more wish fulfillment!

Woohoo! Wish fulfillment! If there is one thing Awakening does well it is wish fulfillment

[Red Falcon]

The Avatar doesn't though.

yeah but who cares about meaningful development of an otherwise bland character

when you can have more wish fulfillment!

You're both creating a problem with the avatar and/or don't seem to understand them properly.

In truth, the avatar is not actually a character. If the avatar was meant to be a character, they would have a set name and appearance. But you are supposed to customise them. The avatar is supposed to be you. Hence being an avatar, instead of another uncustomisable character like Chrom. You are supposed to project yourself onto the avatar. So their "character" is not supposed to gain anything. It's you. You are the one who develops. They only appear to be bland because you're not projecting anything. You're not experiencing the situation; you're relying upon them to develop. But their "character" doesn't. Because that's not the avatar's role.

Edited August 7, 2014 by Red Falcon

[sirmola]

You're both creating a problem with the avatar and/or don't seem to understand them properly.

In truth, the avatar is not actually a character. If the avatar was meant to be a character, they would have a set name and appearance. But you are supposed to customise them. The avatar is supposed to be you. Hence being an avatar, instead of another uncustomisable character like Chrom. You are supposed to project yourself onto the avatar. So their "character" is not supposed to gain anything. It's you. You are the one who develops. They only appear to be bland because you're not projecting anything. You're not experiencing the situation; you're relying upon them to develop. But their "character" doesn't. Because that's not the avatar's role.

It's true that that is what he's supposed to be, but IMO, he does a pretty bad job of it. He has just enough personality for that to not work, but not enough to be interesting.

[Loki Laufeyson]

You're both creating a problem with the avatar and/or don't seem to understand them properly.

In truth, the avatar is not actually a character. If the avatar was meant to be a character, they would have a set name and appearance. But you are supposed to customise them. The avatar is supposed to be you. Hence being an avatar, instead of another uncustomisable character like Chrom. You are supposed to project yourself onto the avatar. So their "character" is not supposed to gain anything. It's you. You are the one who develops. They only appear to be bland because you're not projecting anything. You're not experiencing the situation; you're relying upon them to develop. But their "character" doesn't. Because that's not the avatar's role.

If this is the case, why dont we have the Silent Protag option in the localized version?

[The Geek]

If this is the case, why dont we have the Silent Protag option in the localized version?

Because the localization team was lazy?

[Czar_Yoshi]

The avatar is supposed to be you.

I'm the player. I do things. For the Avatar to be an extension of me, (s)he needs similar abilities to affect the game world, and changing a line of dialogue or two won't cut it. I need to be able to choose between a long, drawn-out maritime battle where I could spare those who surrender and instantly frying my entire opposition in a death trap with no warning. I need to be able to choose whether to risk falling under Validar's control and entering the Dragon's Table, or fleeing and leaving my friends without a tactician. I should even be allowed to decide whether to follow Chrom and co to the village in the Prologue. I should not be railroaded and then have every "decision" my character makes for me lauded as awesome, even if it wasn't, and my character definitely shouldn't be allowed to run a Gambit Roulette behind my back. So no, Avatar may be intended as a self-insert, but (s)he definitely didn't wind up as one.

Edited August 8, 2014 by Czar_Yoshi