And I’ve seen that series of videos as well. Great pieces, they are. I wish more games would present choices than problems, but it would require much more work to do properly.

And I would have to admit, since you brought up the Bioshock example, that I would be way more interested in the game if the Little Sister situation was a choice instead of a problem. Hypothetically, though, if the situation was a choice to begin with, do you think people would have complained that there was no real gameplay benefit to making any decision? Do you think people would claim that it would be unnecessary filler? Would people in this scenario WANT a problem? I would find it marvelous if it was a choice, but I can’t help but think I may be in a minority on that in the wide scope of gamers.

I do make sure to have Marle in the party during the resurrection, though. Sometimes, the dialogue changes are enough.

Matthew: Hah! I love those videos. :-) Using Floyd and Portnow’s lingo, a poor gameplay decision definitionally relates to a problem, since choices do not have a correct answer and a decision cannot be “poor.” However, I think that role-playing is more strongly tied to choices, and that both provide opportunities for role-playing.

Consider the BioShock example from the video: if the player is rewarded for saving the Little Sisters (a problem), the decision can be reduced to “I will save the girl to get the ADAM.” If he is not (a choice), the decision might be “I will save the girl because that’s what Jack would do.” The latter encourages role-playing because there is no goal but the narrative; the utilitarian approach does not apply.

In that light, I suppose my post is really about how role-players interact when presented with problems. For people like me, a less-than-ideal gameplay solution is still a viable option.

Even in saying this, though, I wish that different party combinations would have more of a narrative impact on one’s journey. Unless the game makes it extremely evident that a certain character should be there (or even forces you into having a certain character in your party), the dialogue is usually quite interchangeable. Sure, characters may say things in their unique styles of speaking or whatnot, but they don’t usually seem to have their own opinions on things. The short of it, I suppose, is that party member selection should always have more of a narrative impact, but that would require more work on a developer’s part.

Your point about aesthetics is well taken (though I’m not sure it has anything to do with effeminacy). I’ve definitely created character classes around the available armor and weapons so that I’d be maximally effective with the coolest-looking stuff. And why not? Even in a single-player game there is inherent pleasure in customizing your character, so we might as well make the most of it!

Incidentally, I’m always amused when games begin with incredibly detailed character creators, and then moments later strap a helmet over your meticulously crafted facial features…and then you spend the whole game staring at the back of that avatar’s head anyway. I love character creators all the same, though.

I think an extension of this idea is aesthetic value of equipment in MMOs. I played Final Fantasy XI for a year (compared to a few months with WoW), and I know that I hated my outfit not being terribly cohesive. Particularly at the lower levels, optimal outfitting meant none of your armor going together, which sucked. I went out of my way to do quests or farm drops that made my equipment good for both gameplay and LOOKING good.

…this post makes me sound really effeminate, but hey, looks matter.