Explicit path choice

[papillon]

Vague design problem I'm thinking about with current project. It is possible, through choices, to meet the prerequisites by the critical plot-fork to get onto multiple character's paths. Because of the way the narrative works it's not IMO possible for the character to make a choice distinguishing between them at that point without it breaking the story flow. My original intention was that the 'main' character option would take precedence over the 'side' character option and we'd just quietly head down that path without the player noticing.

However, on replay it may be tricky for the player who doesn't know the game in and out to avoid accidentally triggering the main paths while trying to get the side paths.

In a situation where you have multiple paths unlocked but can only pursue one, what would make the most sense to you?

A player-level choice that takes you out of the narrative, asking you clearly which path you want
A player-level choice, but only if you've already gone down one of those paths before. Otherwise just go silently to the main path.
A character-level choice to break the tie, even if it's slightly awkward
A character-level choice, but only if you've already gone down one of those paths before

Or something else?

Clear path choices break realism, but sometimes people playing really do just want to get to Character X's Route. Thoughts?

[redeyesblackpanda]

Clear path choices break realism, but sometimes people playing really do just want to get to Character X's Route. Thoughts?

Personally, I don't see the point in compromising quality and immersion. There are walkthroughs or hints for the people that really, really, do care, and want to go down a specific rout, which should be enough.

[papillon]

In the case where you could have done everything to unlock a route and still not get it because you also unlocked another route by accident, frustration is likely to be much higher even WITH a walkthrough.

That's why I mentioned bringing it up only if you've already seen one ending. If you've already seen path A and you've now played through making different choices and put yourself in a position where you could go to either path A or path D, it's more likely that you are trying to see new content and will be irritated by being stuck on the same path again. I don't want players throwing ragefits.

IIRC Shira Oka automatically locks out any path you've already completed, so you'd automatically fall into the next available option. I could do that as well, but I feel like that would also be confusing if the player didn't see why it was happening.

[Auro-Cyanide]

I'm thinking I would prefer a tie breaker. Forcing people on to a main characters route could be frustrating because I could imagine I would just re-load and try again if I was after the other character. Locking a path after completetion also seems odd if someone wanted to replay a path or part of a path only to find they can't get on it. Is there a way to put in a choice for a tie breaker without breaking the forth wall and just ask the player what they want?

[Dim Sum]

-Add *NEW to side choice menu.
-Remove words NEW and just keep * after route completed.

Optional: Corresponding sfx to differentiate when new choice is revealed.

[LateWhiteRabbit]

A character-level choice to break the tie, even if it's slightly awkward

This would be my choice, and it doesn't have to be awkward. One final choice to decide on a path to go down should be able to be woven in. The tie-breaker doesn't even have to be explicitly selecting a character - only something tangentially related to them. Maybe choosing a location to visit, or an activity to pass the time.

Or, you know, the BEST solution is to rework all the choice structure so paths start mutually excluding each other before the the split you are referring to. Instead of being able to pursue an activity with two dateables, make the activities occur at the same time so only one can be chosen. Ensure one dateable is antagonistic to another and breaks it off if you go too far with both of them at once. Etc. Etc.

I recommend not being too obscure with choices and paths - Date Warp about killed me with the subtlety.

Oh, my God, Alben! The way to your heart is pushing back and confronting you - except that one time it ruins everything and makes you unobtainable.


I don't think figuring out HOW to be with a romance-able character should be a puzzle - it should be a journey with a clear starting point and path to follow.

I love the simplicity of some of the dating sims from the 1990s. Is the girl on the swim team? Try out for sports to impress her. She mentions she jogs most mornings? You see the Park location has a "jog" option. You go jogging to try and run into her. It's actually pretty similar to what people do in real life when they want to date someone. They show an interest in their hobbies and activities. I shouldn't have to worry about HOW to get a character to like me, only what the result will be. It can be a nice mystery or easter egg to discover a new character, but once found or introduced, I shouldn't have to make a spreadsheet or flowchart to figure out how to pursue them.

Alternatively, I really liked what they did in Mass Effect when you strung two crew members along romantically to a certain level. They confronted you together in a nice little emotionally charged scene and made you pick.

[Auro-Cyanide]

Alternatively, I really liked what they did in Mass Effect when you strung two crew members along romantically to a certain level. They confronted you together in a nice little emotionally charged scene and made you pick.

As long as one of the choices is 'neither' XD

[LateWhiteRabbit]

Alternatively, I really liked what they did in Mass Effect when you strung two crew members along romantically to a certain level. They confronted you together in a nice little emotionally charged scene and made you pick.

As long as one of the choices is 'neither' XD

I believe at that point, you had to have made explicit romantic advances multiple times on both characters. There really was no danger that you didn't want one of them.

[Auro-Cyanide]

Alternatively, I really liked what they did in Mass Effect when you strung two crew members along romantically to a certain level. They confronted you together in a nice little emotionally charged scene and made you pick.

As long as one of the choices is 'neither' XD

I believe at that point, you had to have made explicit romantic advances multiple times on both characters. There really was no danger that you didn't want one of them.

Maybe you decide you don't want either since it's going to be messy either way? But my point was entirely to do with ME, I never did that in the game. But when put in that situation in VNs when generally you have just spend time with both characters, it would be nice to have to option to go 'Nope, I'm not picking, I'd rather have neither!'. It would be interesting in my opinion. Either that or I like just watching conflict >:D

[LateWhiteRabbit]

Maybe you decide you don't want either since it's going to be messy either way? But my point was entirely to do with ME, I never did that in the game. But when put in that situation in VNs when generally you have just spend time with both characters, it would be nice to have to option to go 'Nope, I'm not picking, I'd rather have neither!'. It would be interesting in my opinion. Either that or I like just watching conflict >:D

I'm kind of that way in real life (except the watching conflict part). When people give me ultimatums I always pick the threat. I despise drama, so more than one relationship has ended when my then girlfriend gave me an emotional ultimatum and I picked the relationship ending choice. I've also been on the other side, where myself and another guy found out we were both dating the same girl. We confronted her together, but it wasn't to make her choose, it was to break it off. (We waited to do it until Valentine's Day - because I guess we were vindictive like that. Sights you don't want to see: Both of the men you are dating arriving together on Valentine's Day morning . . . .)

I would argue that if players can have a "tie" between multiple characters at the midway point in a game, not enough has been done to differentiate the choices and characters. Something like that should only be possible if the player is explicitly trying for a "harem" ending. Otherwise each player should have a definite favorite, or at least a "goal" character for that play through. If they can accidentally stumble into qualifying for multiple paths at once, not enough has been done to organize the choices and story structure.

[papillon]

I would argue that if players can have a "tie" between multiple characters at the midway point in a game, not enough has been done to differentiate the choices and characters. Something like that should only be possible if the player is explicitly trying for a "harem" ending. Otherwise each player should have a definite favorite, or at least a "goal" character for that play through.

In a game with a heavier emphasis on plot and less on romance this doesn't always make sense. I can't explain very well without spoilers, alas, but the difference between the main characters and the side characters has to do with their amount of involvement in the central plot. If you have gotten drawn into the central conflict it's only logical that things would continue with you as a part of that main story, rather than you being shut out of the big battle plan and instead going to hang out with the baker you met on a sidequest.

The paths you're unlocking are not a matter of "The PC loves this character best and chooses to pursue him/her!" but "Based on the PC's actions so far, this character chooses to pursue an alliance with the PC." That's what makes a last-minute tiebreaker feel really awkward to me. Even if she mused about who she most wished was available to help her (not who she was most in love with!) how would the other characters know?

I'm trying to balance the needs of the story with the needs of the player. Right now I think I'm leaning for "If you've already done the main path and you end up unlocking both on another runthrough, then shoehorn in the awkward choice. Otherwise default to main."

(As for Alben - well, he IS a difficult boy. )

[LateWhiteRabbit]

The paths you're unlocking are not a matter of "The PC loves this character best and chooses to pursue him/her!" but "Based on the PC's actions so far, this character chooses to pursue an alliance with the PC." That's what makes a last-minute tiebreaker feel really awkward to me. Even if she mused about who she most wished was available to help her (not who she was most in love with!) how would the other characters know?

I still think this can be handled by better structuring of choices, but a big tie-breaker moment could actually be dramatic in the context of your game. Instead of making a pedantic choice, why not create a scene that specifically hinges on the player making an irreversible decision during a moment of tension or drama? I'm going to reference Mass Effect again, because I think Bioware actually makes VNs with fancy animations and shooting. At one point in the first game, you are made to choose between helping one character or another, and both will die without your help, but are too far away to reach both of them. So you have to make a split second choice, and one path is closed forever.

Honestly, as long as your characters all have different and exclusive goals, it shouldn't be possible for the player to be in a position to ally with all of them by the midway point. The Walking Dead game by Telltale does a great job with character choices and paths. One character even gets angry and tells you that you can't sit on the fence forever and be everybody's friend, because that's untenable and everyone wants something different. (Character's can actually take one another's place in the storyline - one or the other may save you in the same situation, but each will do it for their own reason and in their own way. Linear story is preserved, but choices still feel like they matter.)

You might be trying to make the game's path too intertwined and similar to save on assets. Sure, the player may always have to be part of the big battle, but why not in radically different ways? All the possible characters can't want the same outcome. Every choice the player makes should hamper or help those individual goals - it shouldn't take too long before enough helping or hampering has been done to make certain characters mutually exclusive from each other in terms of who the player can side with.

(As for Alben - well, he IS a difficult boy. )

He's a bi-polar meany is what he is.

[papillon]

Sadly I really can't explain how it works without massive spoilers. You'll just have to play the game when it's done and discuss the path structure with me then?

Another option that I used to see in Japanese-translated games is to declare that the side characters are sidestories and do not belong in a normal playthrough. In that case, a playthrough would ONLY give you the mutually exclusive main paths or failure path, but meeting the requirements for a side path would unlock it as something you could choose from the main menu.

[ThisIsNoName]

Just wondering: is it possible to be "tied" with two mains, or two sides? One idea that I would really like to see is to either stop the main story, or continue the main story. That way it not only lets the player choose the character, but also control the story. If I either am not particularly interested in the main story, or have already completed it, it might be nice to "explore" the story through different characters.

Of course, this only applies to some stories, and doesn't apply to others, so take it with a grain of salt.

[PyTom]

One idea is would be to have a "half-point" choice, earlier in the story. (This could be something as simple as to who the player decides to talk to first.) On normal playthroughs, the half-point choice would be irrelevant - it's only used to break the tie.

(As a player, I would want it to be late enough that it's not necessary to replay the entire game to change the choice, though.)