I was starting to wonder, what's more interesting? To have a story tell three different ways of moving forward and ending, or to just do away with any pretense of choice and make it one cohesive, running story?
Both are perfectly viable. Neither option is bad. Think about what's best for your story.
In prose, theater, comics, and film, there is only one narrative. The story begins and (hopefully) ends, and audience almost never gets to influence it. There are only a few instances of experimental fiction with variable endings.
In gamebooks, many pencil-and-paper RPGs, and quite a few video games, the reader/player gets to influence the story. This can range from the simple act of turning pages in a gamebook to the moment-by-moment and significant decisions which can be found in complex games.
It's possible to offer an illusion of choice. But many people will consider this a copout. So unless your story is about a person who doesn't actually have free will, it may not be wise to present choices that lead to the same outcome.