Tip:
Highlight text to annotate it
X
Hello, ladies and gentlemen. My name is Alice and I'll be your narrator for today. The following
video essay is written by NikuMuchi. If you like you can turn on closed captions. And
in case you're wondering: Yes, I will be speaking the entire 20 minutes. Alright, let's get
started. In your life as a gamer, you probably came
across a moment where a game asks you a question, but doesn’t accept no for an answer. You
say: “Why do they even ask?” but in a rhetorical way without really wanting to know.
While you’re here, you hopefully do want to know, because providing an answer to this
is the point of this video. The phenomenon we’re interested in is called
“But Thou Must” by TV tropes. The term derives from the game Dragon Quest where a
princess asks you to let her accompany you. If you refuse she simply says “But thou
must” and then asks again as if nothing happened. You can stand there for like half
an hour and answer no. It loops infinitely until you say yes.
This crosses into the territory what extra credits calls “The illusion of choice”.
But the difference is, that those illusionary choices are invisible or intuitive. You choose
the only thing possible without even noticing. And then there’s “negative possibility
space” where the game designers react to the fact that the player isn’t doing what
they expected. But this is more about things the developers didn’t initially know it
was possible at all. If they present you the thing you are not meant to do on a silver
platter, then they better be prepared for it.
To clarify what we are talking about, let us shortly talk about what we are not talking
about. This is not about choices in video games that claim your choices matter when
they really don’t. In those cases we expect a certain choice to have major consequences
and are disappointed in the end or in our second play-through to realize it didn’t.
No, no, no. This is an entirely different league. We’re talking about choices that
are presented in a critical situation but aren’t really choices. Those who literally
have no effect whatsoever or where it’s so insignificant that it’s basically nothing.
Or in the worst case, your choice is invalid despite being of great importance. You can
instantly see the outcome so that they might not bother asking in the first place.
We are not talking about sidequests, where an NPC asks you to look out for something
or kill/collect stuff. It’s optional, so choosing not to do it is a legitimate way
to deal with it. There are a few cases where your negative
answer results in a game over. But since this is a major consequence, it doesn’t count.
Sometimes all of your options are iterations of yes. It could be a joke, or a meta-narrative
that addresses the player. By demonstrating that you can’t give a negative response,
the game makes a point. But that doesn’t help us answer our initial question.
We are also not talking about situations where you are given information and then asked if
you understood it. Reassuring the information sticks makes sense from a game design point
of view when the opportunity to hear it disappears. The influence the choice has, must stop right
there in the very same situation for it to be a “But thou must” moment. That, however,
is not the case when your relationship with the character you are talking to changes.
Or when you get Paragon or Renegade points. The game rolls with your particular choice,
but there are long term effects. We are looking for the null and void here.
That was a pretty big disclaimer. So, since this is a trope we can see this kind of stuff
in a lot of games. Typically it’s single-player campaigns with a linear storyline. Mostly
RPGs and Adventures but also some which incorporate elements of these to a minor degree. Poorly
written ones I might add. You would think it’s due to the player character
being a silent protagonist and merely a vessel for the player. Take a look at two similar
games: Secret of Mana and Secret of Evermore. In both games, the personality of the hero
is mostly defined by their background. They are not exactly silent, but pretty obidient
for the most part and take a back seat when something is decided. In Mana, you encounter
“But thou must”-moments, in Evermore you don't. There is more to it than that, but
for now, let's agree that the personality is not the main reason why this trope exists
in so many games. Obviously these types of games are strictly
plotted and don’t have an alternate scenario where you live your life with the refusal.
There is no branch, only a dead end. Games are limited in their capacity and old games
especially. Every line of dialogue has to convey as much as possible because it takes
up valuable memory space. For every choice the player makes there has to be content or
some form of acknowledgement that the choice happened. Giving the player unlimited freedom
is just not realistic so there have to be compromises. These compromises can be handled
reasonably and creatively. But if they just don’t care, you get something like “but
thou must”. It is likely the choice was put there after the fact. Maybe it’s a placeholder
and no one went through it a second time to replace it with something better.
Looping lines is not the only variation. The dialogue could just end. You have to talk
to the person anew and sometimes even listen to the whole speech all over again. But the
fact still stands, that you are stuck and can’t progress until this is settled. A
less harmful variation is, when your answer doesn’t make a difference. You are still
able to continue without any interruption. You may get a different reaction and that’s
it. This might be superficial, but in the mind of the player there is the illusion you
are distinguishing yourself, even though no one mentions it again. Game design is more
concerned about the act and the process, not necessarily what remains in the end.
There exist moments when you are asked for confirmation when nothing important is happening.
The game consults you when something is about to change that cannot be undone or reset.
Like the environment or your inventory. It doesn’t have to be bad or seal off some
possibilities. The game just informs you that something will be somewhat different afterwards.
For the sake of coherence everything that doesn’t contribute to the laid out plot
is ignored. That’s why the player’s death is not a factor in the overall scheme when
he falls into a pit and respawns at the ledge, moments later.
Just to illustrate this point, take Prince of Persia: The Sands of Time as an example.
The game has a narrative framing device. Everything that takes place is part of the narration.
So are the mistakes. If the player keeps on dying repeatedly the narration becomes an
unorganized mess. The listener (i.e. Farah) would get bored of how unfocused the story
is being told and would feel like the Prince is wasting her time. And it’s not very elegant
or graceful as a presentation. The same would happen if he went into detail about all the
choices that don’t move the plot forward. In Rambo on the NES Colonel Trautman offers
you a mission in the beginning of the game. This mirrors a scene in the movie with a critical
dramatic function. “The Call to Adventure” what we like to call it is a phase in the
hero’s journey. The Rambo in the movie accepts eventually and thus the story unfolds. If
he refused, there wouldn’t be a story. Most likely the developers put a choice there to
reflect the source. There are some stories depicted in movies where the hero initially
declines the Call to Adventure. But eventually he makes up his mind or is convinced further
by a mentor or another disaster. This is also part of the hero’s journey. It can be powerful
and it deepens the character. The majority of story-driven games don’t know what to
do with this moment. Either they eliminate this detour entirely, or it is not up to you
to decide, because you're trapped in another world. In most games the sole purpose of the
story is to contextualize gameplay. Character depth or growth are secondary at best.
The game needs the hero to say yes because that’s how the story goes and what the script
says. That’s what the events to come rely on. There is only one version: The hero survived
and answered every question correctly. If you refuse, there would be a plot breaking
contradiction in the predetermined future. History abhors a paradox.
To justify the fact of there being a “predetermined path” you have to follow, the game often
times makes you the chosen one, or says it is your destiny. It is usually japanese games
who make use of this cliche. Western stories normally tell the tale of a regular person,
who is forced by circumstance to take matters in his own hands. However, it is true there
was something different about him from the start, but didn't have a chance to prove himself.
He starts as a nobody and becomes a hero in the end.
In japanese games you are pretty much right from the start a hero and there is nothing
really wrong with your life. The fact that you have to prove your worth after your calling
is just a self-fulfilling prophecy. Everyone knew you would succeed because they cannot
be wrong about you in all their wisdom. Let’s take a look at Zelda. Ocarina of Time
is the first instance where you encounter “But thou must” moments. The Deku Tree
calls upon you to rid him of a curse. You can refuse. If you do, the Deku Tree assumes
you need more time to prepare. You can’t answer: “Look, Deku Tree. I am fully prepared
but I just don’t want to. Savvy?” What the Deku Tree meant to say is: “Aw yes.
Go then and waste your time until you come to realize that there is nothing else to do.”
After you completed the first dungeon, the Deku Tree bids you to listen to the story
of the three goddesses. Again you can decline, but he tells it anyway. Later on when you
meet up with Zelda for the first time she asks you if you have the Kokiri Emerald, which
you do. If you lie about it, she demands you to tell the truth. This goes on forever until
you give up. Shortly after she wants you to promise to not tell anyone what she is about
to say. She nags you to not be a blabber-mouth if you refuse. Two minutes later, she offers
you to look through the window to see Ganondorf. Both yes and no lead to the same result. Near
the end of this conversation Zelda wants you to believe her, but you can tell her she’s
full of crap. She claims her prophecies have always been accurate, so you have to accept
it. In this first hour and a half do we already
have six cases of “but thou must”. Was either of these even necessary? There are
ways to make the player choose without having him answer a question. Through action for
example. The Deku Tree could have just told you how it is and then open his mouth for
you to enter. That’s how other Zelda games before handled this. In the first you enter
a cave and then touch the item you want to have. Or you can just leave. In the second
a townsperson offers you a service and then goes ahead. You accept by following and reject
by leaving. It’s not like they get mad at you for making them wait. The same goes for
any task they give you. A woman says “Our trophy was stolen.” Not even “Go get it!”
They treat you like an adult. No one has the right to order you around. But it’s not
optional, because her uncle teaches you the Jump Magic, which is crucial. In Link’s
Awakening you can refuse to give someone back their belonging just to be a ***. But this
isn’t mandatory. You can reject Richard’s deal to look for his Golden Leafs, collect
them anyway and he then talks to you as if you agreed. Somehow you did, didn’t you?
An interesting fact is, that there are no ”but thou must” moments in Majora’s
Mask. A lot happens against your will, but that’s the point. The game doesn’t stop
for you to confirm to chase after the Skull Kid or Tatl to accompany you. Instead it assumes
Link possesses common sense. Even in Twilight Princess they didn’t feel the need to shoehorn
in a question if you allow Midna to take the lead. But then in Skyward Sword it’s back
with a vengeance. In Zelda it is common that people can read your mind or it’s the wind
that tells them your name. It is absolutely possible to not have you answer anything at
all with a style like this.