(Note: There are certain contexts I have ignored in the name of simplifying the two dilemmas, as my goal is to highlight what player agency does for the game, not debate the chosen cases)
It appears clear to me that a key component of the masterpiece that is The Witcher 3, is the degree of player choice offered. To give a contained example, early in his journey, Geralt is tasked with identifying and stopping a murderer. After investigating, he realises the murderer is in fact a werewolf, who spends most of his life as a human, actively trying to contain his outbursts. This creates a dilemma – should this unfortunate soul who has no malicious intent be killed for something he cannot control, on the basis that it would save the lives of others? I chose what clearly seemed to be the lesser evil, but the key point here is that the game gives the player the choice, which does two important things for immersion.
Firstly, though Geralt is his own character, the player’s influence over his response to every moral and critical choice means we never feel estranged to him, and are fully aligned with our protagonist at all times. Due to the invariable ideological differences within a player base, only a game offering a somewhat dynamic protagonist can ensure we are fully aligned with the character, and therefore support them in everything they do. With this unwavering support for the character inevitably comes a greater investment in their success, which undeniably makes for a more immersive experience.
Second, is the way our control over situations creates a full sense of responsibility for their outcomes. At another point in the story, we are presented with a character (of sorts) who is trapped by a curse, but promises to save a group of innocents we know to be in danger if she is freed. The problem is, if we enquire as to how the character became cursed, she avoids the question and provides no satisfactory response. The dilemma here:do we release a hugely powerful and dishonest being, because she is an enemy of our enemy, and claims she will free the innocents? By killing her, I felt fully responsible for the later deaths of the innocents, who just might’ve been saved had I risked breaking the curse, in a way I simply wouldn’t have were I to watch Geralt make this decision from the back seat. Of course, the responsibility felt when making these decisions also relies on the characters involved being expertly crafted, such that you care for them, though whilst the game does this masterfully, it is not the focus of this article. Furthermore, this contained example is only the tip of the iceberg, as these choices become so much more meaningful when you are deciding the fate of primary characters within the experience.
So, to wrap up my ramble, player choice plays a key part in this being one of the best games ever made, by making us both feel fully invested in our protagonist’s success, and fully responsible for the mixed fates of those who are a part of it. This is also a fine example of how the interactive nature of video games can truly elevate them above conventional storytelling mediums.
Notable:
- Admittedly, other games feature player choice, yet I feel the positive effects are multiplied exponentially by the near-unrivaled writing and depth of The Witcher 3, making it the perfect game to focus on.
- Regarding the first point made, I realise many texts intend for you to be repelled by the protagonist’s actions or nature at times, and that this is integral to their story, however I would argue just as many wish for the reader to be aligned with their protagonist, and fail due to an inevitable difference of outlook/ideology within at least one segment of an audience.
Gamedy 