Somebody needs to give me 30 million dollars so I can show everybody how you should do interactive fiction.

Life is Strange was kind of interesting, and it proclaims that your choices matter. But then it undermines that constantly.

1. The game has a time rewind mechanic. This means your choices aren't permanent. If you regret your choice, you can do it again. What's the point of making your choices ostensibly matter - meaning that they have consequences - if you don't have to live with the consequences?! If you want player choices to matter, they need to be permanent, so that the player actually has to weigh what to do!

2. If you choose 'wrong', the game chastises you and suggests you rewind time to get a better outcome. How about letting the story roll with my choice? Why even bother making me choose if you are going to tell me what the "better" choice is? The game should just be designed with all those contingencies in mind.

3. The choices are binary rather than organic. Remember in Beyond Two Souls how you can just choose to nope out of the bar to avoid being sexually assaulted? No prompt, no script, just you deciding to turn around and walk through the door. Remember how you can choose to just shoot and kill Ana Navare in Deus Ex? Just point and shoot like any enemy. This game has none of that. Every choice is clearly marked as a choice, rather than having them arise organically from the game's possible actions.

The camera is also uncomfortably close to the main character.

These types of games are getting better, but I see the same mistakes over and over again.

1. Forced actions. I realize there has to be SOME restrictions on actions in order for a story to happen at all, but in the beginning, I just wanted to leave without washing my face. A major event happens in the bathroom, which is why you have to do it. The game should be set up so that if I choose not to go to the bathroom, the story is jump started in some other way, or better yet, take a completely different direction now that a major event was hidden from me.

2. Lip sync. The lip sync was awful, and ruined immersion quite a bit. Why is this so hard to get right? Lip sync has been convincing since 2004 in HL2. Why is every game not spot on? This makes no sense at all.

3. Voice acting. It's decent, but it needs to be better. Beyond Two Souls was great because it had actual actors, however the lines themselves were often painful. This game had the opposite problem: decently written (could be way better though), but with mediocre performances.

4. Actions don't matter enough. A corollary to 1, I feel as if these games don't change enough based on your actions. It should be possible to get two COMPLETELY different stories if you make significantly different choices early enough. I know that's a lot to write and to think about, but that's why you have testers try to undermine your narrative early, figure out what they'd want to do, and write around that. A big job, but do it and you'll have an amazing experience.

Maybe someone will get it totally right in the next 15 years. But oh yeah, the game is worth buying.

Somebody needs to give me 30 million dollars so I can show everybody how you should do interactive fiction.

Life is Strange was kind of interesting, and it proclaims that your choices matter. But then it undermines that constantly.

Does it? Because the things you say about this five part episodic game, of which you have played a single part, completely contradict what the game actually did. I'm left wondering if you just skimmed the game or if you gave it a real play through. For example:

1. The game has a time rewind mechanic. This means your choices aren't permanent. If you regret your choice, you can do it again. What's the point of making your choices ostensibly matter - meaning that they have consequences - if you don't have to live with the consequences?! If you want player choices to matter, they need to be permanent, so that the player actually has to weigh what to do!

Wrong. The choices are permanent. You can only rewind within a short period of time and once you choose to move past the indicated important choices you cannot rewind back and remake them. If you choose to water your plant, to use a (probably!) non-spoilerific choice, you can't three scenes later go back and reverse your decision. That is, you will have to live with the consequence. The reason you haven't seen the consequences yet is, as I noted above, you are playing part one of five... and the other four parts are not out yet.

2. If you choose 'wrong', the game chastises you and suggests you rewind time to get a better outcome. How about letting the story roll with my choice? Why even bother making me choose if you are going to tell me what the "better" choice is? The game should just be designed with all those contingencies in mind.

Incorrect. Max, the character you are playing as, doubts herself no matter what choice you make. At every single prominent decision point she will wonder to herself if she shouldn't use her powers to do things differently giving you the option to see what else you can do. A few of the choices, like watering the plant, seem clearly better than the alternate choice, but some other choices I am happily unsure if I did the right thing or what consequences might result from choosing "wrong."

3. The choices are binary rather than organic. Remember in Beyond Two Souls how you can just choose to nope out of the bar to avoid being sexually assaulted? No prompt, no script, just you deciding to turn around and walk through the door. Remember how you can choose to just shoot and kill Ana Navare in Deus Ex? Just point and shoot like any enemy. This game has none of that. Every choice is clearly marked as a choice, rather than having them arise organically from the game's possible actions.

Erroneous. Not every choice is binary. For instance, when you're in your friend Chloe's room and her dad comes up the outcome can play out four different ways depending on what you do or don't do. I didn't even realize that half the choices were even possible the first time. And not every choice is marked. There are some choices that the game tells you it will remember if you choose to do A or B but will remain uncommented on if you choose C or if you choose not to go near those locations.

But oh yeah, the game is worth buying.

Way to bury the lede.... but I agree. And while it is not a big budget game and does suffer some for it (I wished for better character animation, lip sync included, in places and higher resolution textures on Max... though that may have been a 360 issue) it had a surprisingly engaging first episode and a lovely "Oh crap, so that's where this is going..." hook at the end.

Life is Strange was kind of interesting, and it proclaims that your choices matter. But then it undermines that constantly.

Does it? Because the things you say about this five part episodic game, of which you have played a single part, completely contradict what the game actually did. I'm left wondering if you just skimmed the game or if you gave it a real play through.

Yes, I finished the first episode.

Wrong. The choices are permanent. You can only rewind within a short period of time and once you choose to move past the indicated important choices you cannot rewind back and remake them. If you choose to water your plant, to use a (probably!) non-spoilerific choice, you can't three scenes later go back and reverse your decision. That is, you will have to live with the consequence. The reason you haven't seen the consequences yet is, as I noted above, you are playing part one of five... and the other four parts are not out yet.

But they aren't permanent from the moment you make them. That's the point I am making. The fact that you can change them at all ruins the idea of choices having weight, since you no longer have to deliberate beforehand knowing you get no opportunity to redo. Also watering the plant is a dumb "choice". Why would you NOT want to water it? The choices should have valid reasons for picking either way.

Incorrect. Max, the character you are playing as, doubts herself no matter what choice you make. At every single prominent decision point she will wonder to herself if she shouldn't use her powers to do things differently giving you the option to see what else you can do. A few of the choices, like watering the plant, seem clearly better than the alternate choice, but some other choices I am happily unsure if I did the right thing or what consequences might result from choosing "wrong."

Funny, I initially took a picture of the stepfather / security guard instead of intervening, got chastised, rewound, intervened, and everything seemed a-okay like that was the proper choice.

Erroneous. Not every choice is binary. For instance, when you're in your friend Chloe's room and her dad comes up the outcome can play out four different ways depending on what you do or don't do. I didn't even realize that half the choices were even possible the first time. And not every choice is marked. There are some choices that the game tells you it will remember if you choose to do A or B but will remain uncommented on if you choose C or if you choose not to go near those locations.

That's about the only section I really thought was cool. I got caught, and took the blame for the pot. Of course, the game told me I probably shouldn't have said the pot was mine to keep the scholarship, but whatever. My choice right?

Way to bury the lede.... but I agree. And while it is not a big budget game and does suffer some for it (I wished for better character animation, lip sync included, in places and higher resolution textures on Max... though that may have been a 360 issue) it had a surprisingly engaging first episode and a lovely "Oh crap, so that's where this is going..." hook at the end.

Played it on the PS4, and the graphics are decent but nothing to write home about. It has a more cartoony feel than anything by Quantic Dream, which helps in some places but hurts in others.

I also feel like an episodic approach is the worst way to do a game like this, rather than to have one big package where all the choices and story lines are already integrated and planned out.

Wrong. The choices are permanent. You can only rewind within a short period of time and once you choose to move past the indicated important choices you cannot rewind back and remake them. If you choose to water your plant, to use a (probably!) non-spoilerific choice, you can't three scenes later go back and reverse your decision. That is, you will have to live with the consequence. The reason you haven't seen the consequences yet is, as I noted above, you are playing part one of five... and the other four parts are not out yet.

But they aren't permanent from the moment you make them. That's the point I am making. The fact that you can change them at all ruins the idea of choices having weight, since you no longer have to deliberate beforehand knowing you get no opportunity to redo. Also watering the plant is a dumb "choice". Why would you NOT want to water it? The choices should have valid reasons for picking either way.

Just how short sighted and unimaginative are you?! Taking the picture gives you evidence for the future at the expense of your friend's seemingly delicate perhaps even suicidal mental state. Intervene, and you maybe save your friend but make an enemy out of a unstable security guard who likes to put surveillance on his own family... and everyone else... and who occasionally slaps his stepdaughter and who will very nearly slap you if you play things right! Surely he won't ever be an issue again. Nope, no weight at all...

Incorrect. Max, the character you are playing as, doubts herself no matter what choice you make. At every single prominent decision point she will wonder to herself if she shouldn't use her powers to do things differently giving you the option to see what else you can do. A few of the choices, like watering the plant, seem clearly better than the alternate choice, but some other choices I am happily unsure if I did the right thing or what consequences might result from choosing "wrong."

Funny, I initially took a picture of the stepfather / security guard instead of intervening, got chastised, rewound, intervened, and everything seemed a-okay like that was the proper choice.

Seriously, do you not think through storylines at all!? Like even a little bit?

Erroneous. Not every choice is binary. For instance, when you're in your friend Chloe's room and her dad comes up the outcome can play out four different ways depending on what you do or don't do. I didn't even realize that half the choices were even possible the first time. And not every choice is marked. There are some choices that the game tells you it will remember if you choose to do A or B but will remain uncommented on if you choose C or if you choose not to go near those locations.

That's about the only section I really thought was cool. I got caught, and took the blame for the pot. Of course, the game told me I probably shouldn't have said the pot was mine to keep the scholarship, but whatever. My choice right?

Or in another possibility you piss off your friend so badly she leaves without you. And no matter what you choose Max (not the game, that's just you being negative) expresses significant doubts... If not about school then about making her friend angry.

Way to bury the lede.... but I agree. And while it is not a big budget game and does suffer some for it (I wished for better character animation, lip sync included, in places and higher resolution textures on Max... though that may have been a 360 issue) it had a surprisingly engaging first episode and a lovely "Oh crap, so that's where this is going..." hook at the end.

Played it on the PS4, and the graphics are decent but nothing to write home about. It has a more cartoony feel than anything by Quantic Dream, which helps in some places but hurts in others.

On 360, Max's shirt isn't high enough quality to stay unpixilated from normal camera distances. Stuff like that... It's hard to tell from screenshots if it's similar on the nextgen consoles.

I also feel like an episodic approach is the worst way to do a game like this, rather than to have one big package where all the choices and story lines are already integrated and planned out.

Just wait a bit and you will have one big package...

Somebody needs to give me 30 million dollars so I can show everybody how you should do interactive fiction.

Cody, ultimate programmer and game developer.

Life is Strange was kind of interesting, and it proclaims that your choices matter. But then it undermines that constantly.

Wrong. It provides a twist on the "multiple" choice type of game by not just allowing you to go through multiple scenarios, but encouraging you to experiment through the choices, and follow through with the one you FEEL is best (note that all actions can have a butterfly effect, even the "right" ones).

1. The game has a time rewind mechanic. This means your choices aren't permanent. If you regret your choice, you can do it again. What's the point of making your choices ostensibly matter - meaning that they have consequences - if you don't have to live with the consequences?! If you want player choices to matter, they need to be permanent, so that the player actually has to weigh what to do!

Wrong again. Sammy played through the game first, making her own decisions, and through doing what I felt was the "wrong" thing to do, she actually gained more insight during some scenes than I did by doing the "right" thing. And doing the wrong thing actually affected how I saw some characters. So yes, while I could go back and get Sammy's same scenario, the consequences of the character interaction will be different down the road (for starters, Chloe was joyful at the end with Sammy, but moody with me, even though I feel like my decisions will benefit me better down the road).

2. If you choose 'wrong', the game chastises you and suggests you rewind time to get a better outcome. How about letting the story roll with my choice? Why even bother making me choose if you are going to tell me what the "better" choice is? The game should just be designed with all those contingencies in mind.

Wrong again. Max will always suggest the alternative choice. It's up to you to decide what that is. Remember that you have to play your cards right, so just because you think you can go all in with three aces in a play, it doesn't mean that you're going to win (did you make amends with Pacifica Northwest? Surely that's the right thing to do, right?).

3. The choices are binary rather than organic. Remember in Beyond Two Souls how you can just choose to nope out of the bar to avoid being sexually assaulted? No prompt, no script, just you deciding to turn around and walk through the door. Remember how you can choose to just shoot and kill Ana Navare in Deus Ex? Just point and shoot like any enemy. This game has none of that. Every choice is clearly marked as a choice, rather than having them arise organically from the game's possible actions.

Wrong. As Rag pointed out, the in-room confrontation has four ways (at least) that it can play out, but you're only TOLD to do one. Same for the trip to the basement. Did you save the bird?
Did you leave evidence of your snooping? Probably not, right? That'd be a mistake... right?
Did you water the plant? Of course. Why wouldn't you? That won't come back to bite you later, right? Defending your friend from the security guard is the obvious choice, right? Having photographic evidence won't help you later... right?

The camera is also uncomfortably close to the main character.

I didn't like that either, but it does also help limit what you can see on the screen, so you only notice what you're paying attention to (Sammy took one photo throughout her playthrough, while I managed to get them all since I examine every nook and cranny without expecting the game to highlight everything for me).

These types of games are getting better, but I see the same mistakes over and over again.

I just see what you think are mistakes, but as this is only part 1 of 5, you're fundamentally wrong... as usual.

1. Forced actions. I realize there has to be SOME restrictions on actions in order for a story to happen at all, but in the beginning, I just wanted to leave without washing my face. A major event happens in the bathroom, which is why you have to do it. The game should be set up so that if I choose not to go to the bathroom, the story is jump started in some other way, or better yet, take a completely different direction now that a major event was hidden from me.

You want complete narrative freedom for every minute action... in a non-AAA game. I recommend you play the Mass Effect series. You're going to get everybody killed in ME2...

2. Lip sync. The lip sync was awful, and ruined immersion quite a bit. Why is this so hard to get right? Lip sync has been convincing since 2004 in HL2. Why is every game not spot on? This makes no sense at all.

Different engines and budget. Not everybody has Valve's country working on the game, prioritizing this and that. Remember that when it came down to it, Kojima opted for blinking eyes rather than moving mouths in MGS1. It's a minor problem, and I'd prefer them to focus on more important aspects of the game.

3. Voice acting. It's decent, but it needs to be better. Beyond Two Souls was great because it had actual actors, however the lines themselves were often painful. This game had the opposite problem: decently written (could be way better though), but with mediocre performances.

Again, budget. I'm sure every game would have an all-star cast if they could (although, Destiny does, and look how that worked out)...

4. Actions don't matter enough. A corollary to 1, I feel as if these games don't change enough based on your actions. It should be possible to get two COMPLETELY different stories if you make significantly different choices early enough. I know that's a lot to write and to think about, but that's why you have testers try to undermine your narrative early, figure out what they'd want to do, and write around that. A big job, but do it and you'll have an amazing experience.

Bioshock's two 1/2 endings could be determined from an action taken very early into the game. And people complained. Mass Effect 3's endings all boiled down to three separate decisions made at the very end of the game. And people complained. Half-Life had two non-endings that depended on a split-second decision at the very end... And the people rejoiced.

Maybe someone will get it totally right in the next 15 years. But oh yeah, the game is worth buying.

I enjoyed it. People should get it and show the big studios that change is accepted in the market... Small games like this are catalysts. Look at how Telltale blew up thanks to their Walking Dead games. DayZ started out as a one-man mod, and is now coming to PS4 with huge backing. Warframe started out as a small pseudo-sequel to Dark Sector, and it's now looking to overtake Destiny in ambition and scale (Eight-player Raids, 100-player Relays with trading, communities, and Clan wars, overhauled PvP with Bot-assisted Invasion games)...

Support something that deserves support, and the AAA games might see some more ambition and depth...

Warframe started out as a small pseudo-sequel to Dark Sector

Wait, someone else on this Earth has played Dark Sector? I really liked that game! It wasn't perfect, but it had some really cool mechanics which were new to me at the time.

When I tried Warframe out, I saw an item called a glaive and made the connection right away. Looked it up and found out it was the same developer. Didn't realize it was originally going to be a sequel, though.

Warframe started out as a small pseudo-sequel to Dark Sector

Wait, someone else on this Earth has played Dark Sector? I really liked that game! It wasn't perfect, but it had some really cool mechanics which were new to me at the time.

When I tried Warframe out, I saw an item called a glaive and made the connection right away. Looked it up and found out it was the same developer. Didn't realize it was originally going to be a sequel, though.

There are tons of references to that odd-yet-charming game... Some of the stuff they don't list, such as the character of Frost being a cut Dark Sector Boss, are also neat connections. And then there's the super-exclusive Proto-Suit for Excalibur, which essentially just turns him into Hayden Tenno.

I love when developers put references into their games... Something Bungie sorely missed out on (Hard Light notwithstanding, heh...)

I love when developers put references into their games... Something Bungie sorely missed out on (Hard Light notwithstanding, heh...)

I thought there were quite a few refs in Destiny. Super Pox VLO sneaks in a Marathon reference, for instance. I think the lack of Halo references comes down to IP legalese.

Wrong. As Rag pointed out, the in-room confrontation has four ways (at least) that it can play out, but you're only TOLD to do one. Same for the trip to the basement. Did you save the bird?

When the bird hits the window, the game says 'MAYBE I CAN SAVE THE BIRD'. So you have a binary choice: save the bird or no. A better way would have been for nothing to be said, and the player to think, hmmm I wonder if I can save the bird, instead of being told you can and it's a choice. These types of games need to go beyond HEY, YOU CAN MAKE A CHOICE HERE WINK WINK.

Did you leave evidence of your snooping? Probably not, right? That'd be a mistake... right?

Actually I did leave evidence.

Did you water the plant? Of course. Why wouldn't you? That won't come back to bite you later, right?

That would be stupid. I had no information regarding watering the plant. At least with other choices you can sort of weigh the possible outcomes. But like… it's a plant. I fail to see how watering it or not watering it will have any effect down the line given the info that I have, thus the choice is arbitrary and not meaningful.

Defending your friend from the security guard is the obvious choice, right? Having photographic evidence won't help you later... right?

Binary choice with a prompt: do this or do that. Better would be to force you to walk over to intervene, and not make it a selectable option.

Based on points countered.

turns him into Hayden Tenno.

Ya know what? I had forgotten that was his name.

And the demo played out exactly as Cody describes. I guess the real game has more depth, from reading what Korny is saying, but the demo completely turned me off.

Wrong. As Rag pointed out, the in-room confrontation has four ways (at least) that it can play out, but you're only TOLD to do one. Same for the trip to the basement. Did you save the bird?

When the bird hits the window, the game says 'MAYBE I CAN SAVE THE BIRD'. So you have a binary choice: save the bird or no. A better way would have been for nothing to be said, and the player to think, hmmm I wonder if I can save the bird, instead of being told you can and it's a choice. These types of games need to go beyond HEY, YOU CAN MAKE A CHOICE HERE WINK WINK.

Did you leave evidence of your snooping? Probably not, right? That'd be a mistake... right?

Actually I did leave evidence.

Did you water the plant? Of course. Why wouldn't you? That won't come back to bite you later, right?

That would be stupid. I had no information regarding watering the plant. At least with other choices you can sort of weigh the possible outcomes. But like… it's a plant. I fail to see how watering it or not watering it will have any effect down the line given the info that I have, thus the choice is arbitrary and not meaningful.

Wait, wtf?

I've never played this game you're talking about, so I could be off here... but your first paragraph above says "they TOLD me what the choice was, instead of saying nothing, and letting me DECIDE whether there's a choice - this is bad" and your second paragraph says "they didn't tell me anything, so I had no information to decide whether this was a worthwhile choice or not - this is bad".

Make up your mind, Cody - do you want help, or do you NOT want help?

It gets worse. In both cases you have to go out of your way to even be presented with the choices. So not only is he wrong about the game telling what the right choice is (since all it does is have the main character fret over either choice you choose) and not only is he inconsistent about how much he wants the game to hold his hand, he also completely contradicts his Beyond Two Souls example. He says its good for a game to let you avoid an encounter but both the plant and bird can be completely avoided as well!

All he cares about is criticizing and he doesn't care what facts he has to ignore to get there. :/

Wrong. As Rag pointed out, the in-room confrontation has four ways (at least) that it can play out, but you're only TOLD to do one. Same for the trip to the basement. Did you save the bird?

When the bird hits the window, the game says 'MAYBE I CAN SAVE THE BIRD'. So you have a binary choice: save the bird or no. A better way would have been for nothing to be said, and the player to think, hmmm I wonder if I can save the bird, instead of being told you can and it's a choice. These types of games need to go beyond HEY, YOU CAN MAKE A CHOICE HERE WINK WINK.

Did you leave evidence of your snooping? Probably not, right? That'd be a mistake... right?

Actually I did leave evidence.

Did you water the plant? Of course. Why wouldn't you? That won't come back to bite you later, right?

That would be stupid. I had no information regarding watering the plant. At least with other choices you can sort of weigh the possible outcomes. But like… it's a plant. I fail to see how watering it or not watering it will have any effect down the line given the info that I have, thus the choice is arbitrary and not meaningful.

Wait, wtf?

I've never played this game you're talking about, so I could be off here... but your first paragraph above says "they TOLD me what the choice was, instead of saying nothing, and letting me DECIDE whether there's a choice - this is bad" and your second paragraph says "they didn't tell me anything, so I had no information to decide whether this was a worthwhile choice or not - this is bad".

Make up your mind, Cody - do you want help, or do you NOT want help?

You are misunderstanding.

I do not want the game to scream THERE IS A CHOICE, CHOOSE NOW. However, the game needs to immerse me enough that when I do do something, such as water a plant, I am doing it because other factors have made me think "gee, I should water the plant", not "Oh, a choice prompt has come up giving me the choice to water the plant or not, should I?".

Maybe someone said something earlier, or maybe the plant is for someone or something. Little clues like that would have the player pick up on them, then decide ON THEIR OWN to water the plant. Not because they stumbled upon it and it was an obviously presented binary choice in a prompt, out of context.

When you tell the player that a choice is important, but I cannot see how or why it'll be important, that is bad. So either have your obvious choices be such that I can reasonably think into the future to weigh them, or do the better thing and give the player a reason to do things in an organic way.

So I do not want the game telling me CHOOSE, THIS CHOICE MATTERS, however I want there to be reasons for me to make an organic choice on my own. Basically, games like this should strive to make everything the player does feel like it was the player's idea, not a set of binary decisions presented to you by the game designers.

There is no contradiction. The issue only arrises because they told me there was a choice, which is what I do not like about the game.