Choice

* See also Bioshock Illogic
* See also BioShock_Game_Elements
* See also Storytime and STORY
* See also Story LEGOS ( Choice Shaping Story )
* See also BioShock_SOLO_Game_Redos (More local Choices given Players)
 'Choice' which the Player makes within the game which is supposed to effect some significant story outcome.
 Caveat Emptor : "Let The Buyer Beware" is an implication of CHOICE existing. It is an admonishment to wise/informed Choice. It would be something Ryan would strongly endorse.
--- --- --- --- ---
What Difference Would The Different BS1 Endings Make ?  :
"Evil" Jack did not seem to do much past BS1's end.  Maybe what we saw was just delusions from insanity from Splicing several dozen Tonics and Plasmids is so short a time.   A US Navy Ballistic Missile Submarine' would NEVER be sent to investigate a plane crash EVER ( this was the middle of the Cold Warhttps://www.conservapedia.com/Cold_War after all, and there are plenty of much better surface ships that would be used for that purpose - so sorry no Nukes for 'Evil Jack' ).  Any sub or ship poking at the airliner wreckage right next to that Lighthouse would have reported on it in detail, exposing Rapture ( so it likely would never last for Sofia Lamb's shenanigans years later ).   And such ships have marines, machine guns and rapid-fire cannon aplenty, capable of blasting all them Bathyspheres ( which BTW really CAN'T float nor open its door on the ocean's surface like that anyhow), to decant any horde of (oops Sun-bedazzled) Splicers.
"Good" Jack got away somehow back to civilization with a bunch of reformed Little Sisters ( assuming THAT wasn't also just an ADAM-derived delusion ).   Maybe HE was the one who dreamed about that warped Fever-Dream about that Bizarro-Fantasy-Land Columbia, and all that lame quantum anti-religious BS nonsense.
Whatever happened, Rapture was still there for the events of BS2 to happen, and it even survived after that ( including the Minervas_Den events ) leading to the MMORPG's situation.
--- --- ---
Selective Morality ( For Game Choices ) :
It may depend how you hide Evil in the game - Obscure it for Deniability.
Example -- BioShock has the Little Sisters which the Player has the "Choice" to 'Harvest' ( kill them by tearing their guts out ), but the actual violence is covered up by a green cloud of mist and the sounds of violence are largely eliminated for the child-murder going on ( Yes, it is a sorta-mutant child, with glowing eyes, but since it can be 'Saved' ( as an alternative, and restored to being a 'cute' child ... ) it is thus STILL a child. SO, the realization of actually 'doing the deed' is clouded/obscured, and hasn't the impact of showing it in even partial detail - It makes it easy for the Player to pretend it is the same as merely 'walking over' a game 'powerup'. NO graphic 'Chilling screams' and 'tearing sounds' to make it plain WHAT is really being done by the Player to a child.
This weak 'Harvesting' was in the BioShock game from 2007 with its Sequel in 2010. ( The Pretend 'Social Justice Warrior' written Infinite BS, with its 'lip service' exposition of 'Evil America' societal ills, was to be witnessed later created in 2013 ).
If there is a Player morality 'Choice', then it needs to be explained/reasoned PROPERLY why it exists ( An example of 'offing' children actually exists - actually is extensively advocated by some folk in Our own World, using the excuses of 'inconvenient'/'unwanted'/'burdensome' being sufficient reason to allow it -- "Yes Friends, that's RIGHT HERE in River City ..." "Yes Friends, that's RIGHT HERE in River City ..." - Lines from the Musical Play/Movie "The Music Man" 
And Yes, the game designers created exaggerated targets of this 'immoral morality' - made inhuman or dehumanized so to help ( at least to get the game past the industry/public censors/censure ) - Horrendous mass slaughter of zombies/Nazis/Mutants/Terrorists commonly does not generally seem to generate much hubbub for existing games.
We might realistically see the murder/slaughter in more detail for those 'good' targets ( few details are really ever seen in 2007 quality BioShock ) ... But now it can be some game cliche 'Other' that we hardly can relate to ... 
Consider : The Player in BioShock still slaughters hundreds of Splicers. SO, isn't that "Immoral" for the gamemakers to not offer a different path from doing that ??? 
AND WE murder innocent Big Daddies ( required to Save or Harvest Little Sisters ), but the Player murdering THEM for some reason does NOT count in the gamemaker's 'Good vs Evil' "Choice" Repercussions Calculus. 
--- --- ---
Some Player's Commentary On Alleged 'Choice' In The BioShock Games :
This about the original BioShock (BS1) :
"What disappointed me, was that at this point you spend some time breaking the psychic conditioned control link with Fontaine, and regaining or gaining for the first time the player character's own free will. I expected more paths to open up once this was completed : I get to choose! Will I help Fontaine, or Tenenbaum ? I'm under no one's control anymore but my own ! Right there in the narrative, they state that the bonds that normally constrain player choice in this sort of game are being broken!
But they're not. The Player's range of narrative choice continues to be just as linear from that point forward as it was over the course of the game prior. The writers might have been clever up to that point, but then botched it after that story point when nothing changes."
-
(( It got worse in Infinite BS, where everything you (the Player) did or tried to do is suddenly wiped from existence by game's end. Further was the contradiction of the Elizabeth who did this - herself supposedly was changed to never have existed to be able to do so. It demonstrates the peril of using such ideas as a story Crutch when the writers create a game which does NOT even 'play by its own logic' ( Like the game using causality for one part of its plot, and then ignoring it in another ). Even Fantasy and Magic are supposed to be Consistent. ))
-
Choice Between : The Scroll, The Key, The Sword
Another pointless 'Choice' for Infinite BS. In the MMORPG's REDO, you actually will be TOLD THAT - As it is all Fantastical Bosh anyway - As no one in Columbia actually believed any of it ( just handy iconic basis for their Cultist Police State ).
Have Fearful looks as even the 'White' inhabitants MOUTH the "Prophet's" mandated speech, and people hoping they are seen to be 'sincere' and 'enthusiastic enough'. 
--- --- ---
You got about the same ADAM in BioShock no matter what you did.  The Developers *KNEW* that Players would kill Puppies and sell their Mothers to get better 'buffs' in the game - IF the alternative was getting nothing after acting 'moral'.
It is Only An Alleged Moral Choice :
A moral choice usually has a cost.  If there is no real cost, then the 'choice' is easy ( a non-choice - a 'No Brainer' - No test of moral character ).
What exactly can they do to YOU as the Player to 'cost' ? - Since this is merely a computer game ?    Shame usually requires an Audience to be 'shamed' before.  Rationalizing misdeeds is simple in a game.  You can simply turn it off or 'replay' when you 'get killed'.  Most people are already hardened to any of the poorly presented (and over-saturated) violence ( 'poor' as in hardly gut-wrenching to see a bunch of pixels die/be mutilate ).
Empathy with your targets isn't desired ( certainly with the mass-murderer type body counts you produce  - THAT is the main component of these games ), and for the typical conditioned player, loyalty to allies is worth no more than the stuff you get from them or needing them to get to the next level.
Columbia - They've presented extremes ( Founders/Vox ) to justify the blast-fest part of the game, so little feeling is involved for taking sides - No more than shooting the red vs green ducks in a  shooting gallery.
The 'Thought Experiment' BS now allows the 'It is all a Dream, So who cares' skew to distance the Player further from what is shown to be going on.   These games don't even have much cost for failing nor when you do 'succeed' - the cutscenes at the end do whatever they want regardless.
Exposing most of the game thru the trailers and endless interviews didn't help ( suspense and not knowing what might effect any possible outcomes in-game is now largely gone ).   Ditto (in spades) if the emphasis is supposed to be 'Story'.....
Lets not forget the level of HYPE that leads to over-expectation and the inevitable 'let down' when you discover "Oh, that's all that it is really about" and "I saw that last week 3 times on TV".  It is fortunate then that Infinite's confusing plot and logic fell upon Slaughter-Fest type Game Players who largely didn't care anyway.
--- --- ---
TO HARVEST OR NOT TO HARVETS - THAT IS THE QUESTION :
BS1 - "If you Rescue Her you Get Less ADAM But Tenenbaum has Promised to Make it Worth your While" :
No third choice ? To leave the Little Sister Alone ... The door in Medical Pavilion leading forward wont open until you do one of the two options. The Plasmids you already had ( Incinerate!, Electro-Bolt, Telekinesis ) were plenty to finish the game ( you already have got more than virtually all the Splicers you run into who have been splicing for years ).
SO, Not exactly a 'Moral Choice' that will 'Cost You' if you "Do the Right Thing" (whatever that was).
The designers made a marginal difference in the pay-offs for "Harvesting" vs "Saving" - Maybe because they knew 'which way' the Players would go if you got virtually nothing for the good "Saving" the Little Sisters. It might have been a worthwhile variant to play without alot of Plasmids/Tonics. Wouldn't it have been 'good' to not have to kill so many Big Daddies ? After all, what did they ever do to you ??
--- --- ---
Yes, They ( the BioShock Gamemakers ) Chickened Out :
Consider when in the game : IF you did "the right thing" saving the cute Little Sister mutants and got NO ADAM because of that choice, THEN the Player would be fundamentally penalized and miss out on a significant element of the game - One big element that set it apart from other 'Shooter' games ( and something they spent a great deal of time and money putting into the game ). 
So many Players want the toys, and would even slaughter their Side-Kicks to get those neat ADAM-empowered abilities. 
A possibility could have been an alternate getting Better Guns or Plasmid-equivalent Tech Widgets from the 'Free The Little Sisters Society' (or whatever). BUT that WOULD HAVE required greater gamemaker effort and spending of resources to make further optional Assets/game mechanic scripting(programming) and further expensive testing and balancing.
THEIR Easy Way Out : REWARD nearly equally ( Have No Player 'Cost' for the 'Right' or 'Wrong' decision ).
--- --- ---
Choice Without Cost - NO HARD CHOICE Actually Given The Player :
I think they (the game company) Wimped Out. They had to make the ( supposedly 'good' act of ) 'Saving' Little Sisters pay sufficiently in ADAM/Upgrades. Some Players year ago added up the Payoffs, and it turns out : You actually pretty-much GET the SAME either way ( Save or Harvest Little Sisters ). OTHERWISE, a majority of the game's Players WOULD simply have, desiring the (Higher) ADAM payoffs, KILLED every 'Child' with little thought or care ( and do it 'over and over' ). THEN the game company would look REALLY BAD for encouraging 'That Kind of Thing'. 
ANSWER : GIVE THE SAME REWARDS 
 SO, So much for contrived "Moral Choices", when the 'GOOD' act costs you NOTHING/NO LOSS
IF you got NOTHING for saving the Little Sisters ( versus your obtaining tasty green Ability-Earning/Empowering Goo - for every one of them you gutted ), THEN HOW many Players do you SERIOUSLY think would take that path in this game ?? 
Answer : Too many Players, since YOU slaughter things wholesale in the REST of the game ( and most other games ). WHAT would be the difference with killing a few 'Little Ghouls' ?? 
REAL CHOICES HAVE A REAL COST. ( But not in BioShock )
--- --- ---
Murder Children to Get Goodies ... That's a "Choice" ? : 
Even after they softened the Little Sister killing - Basically hid the grisly detail of what was happening (via green fog/mist and fadeout, and no corpse remaining as evidence of your deed ...), and your rationalized the act ( "They are no longer human", "It is like taking them off life-support" ... ), it still does NOT change what YOU are doing to a child in the game.
Makes me wonder what kind of culture there was at the game production company (Irrational Games) that THEY would make use of such things in their game. Previously (an earlier design/concept), the 'Gatherers' had been some kind of Alien Blob Monster - Players could have little compunction about taking the Kill-It option. The designers didn't think it would generate enough 'Save It' empathy ( and the game's theme later shaped up to copy (an easier) from human 'Nostalgic' world - instead of the (repetitive) alien creature motif from System Shock https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/System_Shock ). They substituting 'cute' children 'Gatherers' when they humanized the games NPCs. 'It is a given' some Players would take the 'kill option' no matter how much attempted empathy was laid on. In the revised game design, they now had to hide the messy dirty work of that option, allowing Players to go for the inhuman 'Choice' more palatal, when the targets were effectively children.
In BS1, an "out" was given through the reward system, where Players got almost as much ADAM/stuff for NOT killing the Gatherers ( so to not hamstring the game-success-important obtaining of the Plasmid/Tonic combat features ). That offset the strong temptation for the majority of Player's to blithely (automatically) perform well-rewarded evil acts. Unfortunately, Good/Bad Right/Wrong ... It did not really matter, because you NOW got the goodies either way. A Penalty (no payoff) for "doing Good" was eliminated - and thus also any real 'morality' to the "Choice". ( Real Moral Choices in the Real World have Costs - this had NONE ).
In such an environment, what might THEY (the game designers) themselves do, or what lengths go to compete/be-successful - IF an HONEST (goodie-less) moral choice was offered ?? Something akin to THE immoral/wrong/bad choice of scarfing down every drop of sweet ADAM from HARVESTED (Murdered ) Little Sisters ? ( "It is Only A Game" ?? "It is only a game!!!" Shriek the Fanbois - Who are basically clueless. ) For Game Players, Optimal Outcome ($$$) usually trumps 'Humanity' ... and IT IS the expected result from the customers. But, But, But ... Playing the EVIL is part of the game !!! ... The Inability to punish immoral behavior in games - inability to give a Proper Moral Lesson - THAT is what is missing. Consider this : Making a game this way is itself a 'moral choice'. Levine & Co made their 'Choice' -- Guess which it was.
Next will be an article about making the Splicers faceless (the masks), and ugly so that slaughtering them wholesale wouldn't seem to be killing PEOPLE ( and the general lack of choice in gameplay OTHER than mass-slaughter ).
This isn't beating a dead horse. It is demonstrating the hypocrisy/moral-bankruptcy allowed/existing in the Computer Game Industry, which needs to be 'soundly beaten about the head' with this issue until they stop doing crap like this.
--- --- ---
See Killing Grace
See Killing Gilbert Alexander
See Killing Stanley Poole
--- --- ---
==Moral Choice : Riiiiiight ... :==
This whole 'Moral Choice' thing is really a joke though.  We go thru Rapture slaughtering HUNDREDS of Splicers 'left and right', and nobody seems to care that THEY might be just as deserving to live as any of the 'bosses'.  But then, options to sneak by all the opponents would run contrary to the game being first and foremost a 'blast-fest' "shoot-em-up" ( the standard fare these days - BioShock really is little different ).   You have little 'choice' in BioShock, as you aren't given the tools to even have a choice.  There no opportunity except with the phony Harvest/Save on Little Sisters -- a 'choice' which has no real consequences except to get a different cutscene at the end of the game.
All Splicers were automatically made hostile - so not much choice for you.  One thing I really wish BioShock 2 (and 1) had included was neutral Rapture inhabitants whom you could choose to kill and loot, ignore, or help : Perhaps pockets of survivors who were in hiding from the Splicers, and who needed to you perform tasks for them such as fight off an imminent invasion of Splicers, or guide them to an escape bathysphere/safety/whatever, or be the only one able to shut the emergency gates before their building is flooded and they all drown.  Lost is small opportunities like this sprinkled throughout the game which would have added more replayability, but also have made the 'game world' and it's inhabitants seem more real.
Infinite doesn't seem to offer much difference at all ( and if anything is less creative in the options given to you ).  They hinted at some improvements in the early trailers, but like so many things which could have been 'better', they were dropped in the final game.  Too hard to do, too delayed, too whatever, Infinite reverted back to the old tired formula - just more 'dumbed down'.
The MMORPGs plot specifically woukd not have the 'Slaughterfest', and would offer much more varied situations and real decisions to make.   There would be no PERMA-DEATH, so consequences to players aren't properly real to that extent, but as a game there is no way that the Player can really be provided fully for proper decisions.  There could be a 'Splicer Role-Playing' subgame that does offer PERMA-DEATH as a feature, but you really would not want to have that for a Player's avatar, as any/all character development ( which is a big part of the game ) would be constantly thrown out/discarded and it would soon become too repetitive/tedious.
--- --- ---
Not 'Moral Choices', But LACK of Them In This Game :
In Fort Frolic, you actively set out to hunt down and kill the 3 people Cohen wants 'for his Masterpiece'.   It is not as incidental as : Exiting from the initial Bathysphere Station along the only path offered, and the Splicer guy goes straight at you ( after throwing some flaming furniture at you ). But that leaves you with little 'choice' as well.  At Fort Frolic there is NO direct "Would You Kindly" in effect for these killings (Imagine what fun Sander Cohen might have had with you if HE knew he could control you like that !!)  Sorry - you are given no 'choice', just do it ... Do the madman's assassinations for him to get your 'reward'. 
The funny thing is : the biggest monster of all - Cohen - Is the one they give a choice of killing or not ( but only after you commit the murders for him ).  And no real consequences whichever way you decide.
Little Sisters Harvest vs Save ?  Covered elsewhere about what a sham that 'moral choice' is.
----
----
----
==MMORPG==
MMORPG - Leave Your Lame 'Moral Choices' At The Airlock :
There is no 'Ending' to the MMORPG, to finally figure out whether what you did mattered or not (or how).
You are going to survive and Rapture will be saved. What 'moral choice' is needed ??? Sure, some Little Sisters you manage to capture to "Save Them" might be "shot while trying to escape", but these things happen, and that ADAM would have gone to waste if you hadn't recovered it ...
Maybe Little Sisters don't WANT to be Saved -- Did you ever think of that ????
The only REAL 'moral choice' is -- Do you WANT to Play This Game ?
--- --- ---
'Moral' Decisions in the MMORPG :
... Should I tip the waitress at the Diner -- these prices are a little high for 'Fish-n-Chips'.
I ask myself - "What would Andrew Ryan do ???"
But then does the NPC waitress actually respond to 'not being tipped' ?? Or might I just as well save it to buy that new "R-34" Wire Cluster I wanted for the Diving Suit ?
--- --- ---
Moral Choice - Yeah Riiiiight :
How much different the game would be IF Tenenbaum only gave you a hardy handshake every time you 'Saved' a Little Sister -- "But it IS the Right thing to do !!" say all the game players. Riiiiiight ...
With no 'gifts' being given for "Doing The Right Thing", a few more Slugs to find might allow you some few Plasmids ( but with alot more deciding which to prioritize to get ). But then, you'd miss out on all those fun Plasmids and Tonics ( which added alot to the gameplay interest on Replays ).
Suddenly the world changes, and Evil Jack reigns in Rapture in 99% of the players game endings ( Drink em lil ADAM prizes and get neat ways to kill shit !!! ) ... WHAT matter if you slaughter some gross mutant children, WHEN there are upgrades you will miss out on when otherwise playing the game ??? The game writers knew this, but 'wussed-out' and made it so "the Right thing" rewarded you just as much ( with the in-game goodies ) as doing "The Wrong thing".
--- --- ---
Originally Levine Did NOT Want The 'Choice' Mechanism in BioShock :
The much touted story Choice of the Player was forced upon him by The Company.
He perhaps got revenge by eliminating Players Choice in Infinite BS ( Literally every action/result you did in the game was WIPED FROM EXISTENCE ). (( Applying such a belief - then Infinite BS could ONLY EVER be a half-assed inferior BioShock game ??? One of those 'Constants' the interviews BS'd about endlessly ??? ))
--- --- ---
Mistakes Learned - BAD CHOICES ARE MADE :
Things that can ruin a potentially good game (Infinite) -- Bad management of game production resources.   All the effort that was wasted on things which were later CUT, which could have gone to provide more/improved game content being delivered.   Estimating and planning what ACTUALLY can be done is the other half of the 'Art' of Game Making.   Having to redo things/make-drastic-changes WHEN it turns out your implementation/ideas/story really just weren't that good (or workable), AND should really have been thought through FIRST.
When all is said and done, 'Ideas are a dime a dozen'.  Delivering a proper product is the hard part.
'Bit off more than they could chew' ...   They are lucky, in most of the Real World, you can't get away with selling half a product.
--- --- ---
Forced Behavior and Perception in Game Play :
Who says that 'Jack' has any Morality to 'test', or thinks in any human way ??? Effectively he is a programmed machine - NOT the product of a properly/naturally developed mind.
Evidence is forced on you perpetrating lies without much counter-evidence available. You are basically on a one directional track of staged events, without much opportunity for objective discovery. Even the mood music in places perpetrates the lies you are given.
You (the Player) go on a killing spree ( and don't much seem to have routes of avoidance most of the time, facilitating you becoming a mass-murderer ).
ADAM use (and addiction ?) is forced upon you.
-
In 'Infinite there were far more 'canned' cutscenes, and compelled Player actions, and artificially blocked paths within levels. Your choices were more forced, the experience Linear-ized. It takes less skill to force Story so obviously.
--- --- --- 
== For The MMORPG ==
"Strange Figures, Weird Figures ..." ( Heard from the Ghost of Groucho Marx )  :
You ( as a previous BS1/BS2 game Player ) are asked at some point in the MMORPG game ( maybe even on creating your Game Account )  *IF* you killed Stanley Poole, Gil Alexander, Sander Cohen, Grace Holloway and how many Little Sisters, BDs, etc... ( Need an option for "Didn't Play" BS1/BS2/MD also ).
SO that data is used to somehow have impact on your game experience.  Strange would be a customized perception of your character ( Reason : you are still a bit crazy from you previous Splicer existence - leftovers "The Cure" couldn't fully undo ).   Alternate event arcs or just subtle variations of things you see/hear in the game.  Impressive would be REAL repercussions for your previous 'Moral Choices' ( probably not detrimental/advantageous, as Players would soon figure it out, and post the 'best' options to pick on the Internet ).  
Variations on : Flashback events, your strange Ex-Splicer dream sequences, "Ghost Stories" (the ADAM hallucinations), differentiated Audio Diaries - To reflect the outcomes of your 'previous' actions.
Too Subtle ?   But then this MMORPG could take things MUCH further than the shoot-em-up games did...
Some similar things might reflect on your actions in the MMORPG ( if you maim/kill a Splicer you have nightmares or somesuch ).
If that is too demanding for integrating into the main game ( It IS alot of coordination effort, but then alot of this game's stuff is ... ), such material could just be included as follow-on stories of the Solo games' plots. The Players could 'play through' as part of the whole Rapture Universe(tm), incorporated into the MMORPG.   Seriously, it just takes a handful of creative Players to create things like this - particularly if they are enabled by the game's Creation Tools and the bulk of stuff ( all the Objects and Templates ) others have already created.  Having them be separate in reality from the MMORPG plotline allows them to go off in strange and amusing directions -- THE Very Artistic Freedom Which Ryan Talked About ( How's that for Meta-level game Theme-ing ... )
--- --- ---
RESTORING the Original Games With Real CHOICE : 
Imagine REDOing the Solo Games plots EXCEPT with REAL Repercussions for your (and others) actions ( as in REAL Morale Choice -- NOT watered down gorp ) : 
* Kill a Little Sister and Tenenbaum abandons you.
* You DON'T kill Grace ( you MUST SAVE ELEANOR (!!) and it is best to leave no enemy behind... ), and then if you don't, she may marshal all her minions to swarm and kill you ...  
* Playing through the whole game(s) without/fewer(found) Plasmids (LS-NoKill) to get the 'good' endings... 
* Alternate paths to achieve the plot goals ( Poole forces you to kill BDs - You have no choice if you want the game to move forward ) ...  
* You figure out Atlas is 'playing you' as a sucker early, and you fight against your conditioning. 
* AT the End it is YOUR hands around Sofia Lamb's throat - and IT IS YOUR decision ...
* You let Ryan live ( or he doesn't do a Surrender Monkey and lets you loose against the now outed Fontaine )
Etc ...  ( SO much potential )
--- --- ---
REDO - Give Jack a Choice ( But His Fate Still Goes Forward ) :
Jack is led by the nose around Rapture - FORCED by game writers to KILL THE 'EVIL' RYAN - All for a rather lame plot 'Twist'.
Unfortunately, there is No (better) possibility offered in the original game for an 'Internal Conflict in Jack' -- IF the Player figures out he's being 'used' ( it might detract from the simpleton's slaughter-fest shooter game I guess - After all, sophisticated/superior games like that ARE Fairly hard to write. )
WYK wins in the end, but then those 'Cords of Control' are loosed and Jack goes after 'The Real Villain of Rapture'.
The Players COULD have been give at least this CHOICE to 'THINK for Themselves', instead of a stacked deck pre-packaging their Fate - without any choice offered at all. Reality can compel People's Fate, but at least they have a chance to try to fight against it.
--- --- ---
King of Welcome Center, Hephaestus, Fort Frolic, Dionysus Park, Paupers Drop ... :
The Game was much more fun with the respawns which allow you to 'take over' the areas you are in, and with harvesting the Splicers that keep arriving, you can stay indefinitely ( So Ryan never dies in THAT dimension ... )
Kinda weird though, 'eating' the organs of Spider Splicers to regain Health, makes you (Jack/BD-guy) kindof a ghoul ( but then you are also injecting Slug Juice into yourself ... and in general a psychopathic mass-murderer ).
I used MY Choice and Became a King ....
--- --- ---
Levine's Bombshell ?? :
Levine says there is no meaningful choices in the game (Infinite BS). In a larger sense, Is this his alibi/excuse for giving the Players an inferior game ?? -- It being merely fate ( for him to create such ) ??? Out of his control ? The Quantumz control all !!! All Hail The Quantumz !!! It was predestined to be a regurgitation sequel of a much better game ...
What if we were to go back in time and drown him ? Hmmmm ( That's one way to possibly get $100 million for this BioShock MMORPG ). I CHOOSE RAPTURE REBORN !!!!! 
--- --- ---
Choices ( Yeah, We Sure Had "Choices" ) ... :
Jack has another 'choice'. To simply stop moving in the direction Atlas/Fontaine (and the game writers) are pushing him. If Jack (the Player) stops short of going into Ryan's Office, ignoring Fontaine's control, then Ryan never dies by his hand, and some other unknown sequence of events follow. Jack can wander around Rapture ( You can take the Bathyspheres back to places you previously were ... ) consuming the harvested proceeds of waylaid Splicers - Forever.
'What ifs' are the meat and potatoes of some fans. It is hard to say what would have happened if Ryan had managed to make Rapture recover -- after the games story has him NOT doing that Stupid Contrived Surrender Monkey Suicide ( good name for a lame 80s rock band "SCSMS" ), and be allowed to have the adventure/challenge of rebuilding Rapture. OR even what it could/should have been without ADAM corroding/poisoning everything it touched ( or having that threat be handled early as it SHOULD have been -- IF the plot hadn't required/contrived it all to be done ineptly/illogically to force the story's 'Fail-topia' ).
Supposedly we had 'choices', but apparently even that much-touted and celebrated "Little Sister Harvest" decision was virtually *No Choice* ( 'moral choices' are ones you make when you realize the actual outcomes, instead of them being unknown and determined by some simple/arbitrary equation - AND which are later found to largely have the same results either way you decide ). 
Alternately, Who says that Jack, being the new ruler of Rapture, didn't actually bring a Golden Age - the consequences afterwards aren't yours -- as after the arbitrary math decides your fate, the rest of the story is driven by a pre-canned sequence (a static cutscene) with no 'Choice' allowed.
===== *Maybe* I liked living in Fort Frolic after I'd "taken over", and no amount of weasel words from Atlas would make me want to 'move forward'/advance/dance-to-his-tune ... That choice is there ( I already had lots of tasty ADAM by that point, whether I'd 'harvested' many Little Sisters or not. ) 'It is Good to be King', instead of a Pawn. =====
--- --- ---
== HOW MIGHT WE HAVE "CHOICE" IN THE MMORPG ? ==
How could this work an explicit CHOICE which affects the Players game experience.
What effects ?
Being trapped in a Choice ? ( Choices have repercussions ... )
Too early in the game when they haven't experienced enough to understand what the choice entails
How does one CHANGE the Choice(s) ?
Choice WITHIN a Mission ? That at least (usually) has limited duration and can be changed for some subsequent Mission.
--- --- --- 
The Immoral Game Making Issue- Nerfed Choice :
"Finishing the game with a few hundred unused Adam" illustrates the fact that your 'Choice' to Save Little Sisters ( "Cuz itz the Rite Thing to do" ) and yet having no penalty involved ( as REAL moral choices usually have - to make your reward spiritual instead of materialist, and significant in the end ) is illegitimate and corrupted.
If this was part of some 'clever' underlying theme 'reveal' that "THERE EXIST NO CHOICE", then it is even more dishonest and devoid of good as far as it being any kind of "game".
Remember the craven 'evening out' the rewards for 'Good' and 'Bad' behavior because it is quite prevalent for Players to not play game's morally if it is harder, or they get less 'stuff'. Many simply will want to win no matter what ( and mass-murder/betray/torture unabashedly to do so ). This particular 'evening' in BioShock was ' engineered' to forestall may Players selecting immorality for an advantage, and thus attempt to avoid accusations that THEIR gameplay encourages immorality ( the gamemakers being the 'Perps' ) WHEN a majority of Players go to 'the dark side' simply for the game's nebulous rewards.
(( Lets Discount the fact that games with multiple plot/story paths/choices are HARD to do ( and require alot more skilled effort ), most likely making it beyond the ability/resources of Levine & Co to do or want to do. ))
--- --- ---
Life to be protected but with lost Freedom, OR to go out Free to see everything, but perhaps starve to death or be eaten by a cat. The eternal Paradox, and an issue is seeking a middle-ground. This could have been an (intended) idea to explore in the game's story. BUT, It came to 'less than nothing' - just wasted space.
BUT THEN, This Game seems to have largely "Missed The Boat" with its many rewrites, or just a general inadequacy. Any such Idea was probably LOST on most Players anyway, who really just wanted Better Combat ( and lots of neat explodey things ) -- But really didn't get them because the game-makers spent so much time rewriting half-baked gorp like this ... ( and being 'mysteriously' vague so they didn't need to cohesively explain anything ).
--- --- ---
Levine Never wanted Choice mechanism in the Original BioShock :
add reference to interview
--- --- ---
Critics Comment : Choice ? I Don't See Much Choice. 
Critics Comment : "The original's (BioShock) plot twist, where the Player discovers that the Player-character Jack has been coerced into events by the trigger phrase, "Would you kindly...", is considered one of the strongest narrative elements of recent games, in part that it subverted the expectation that the Player has control and influence on the game."
To the Contrary : What if the Player quite early notices that there are no doors to choose to anywhere else, but only where the one plot leads to (helping Atlas). I noticed the Atlas posters being of a typical communist imagery fairly early, and wondered why I should follow the fast-talking 'pally' Atlas ( another signal of a con-artist at work ), But I was NOT offered any CHOICE to do anything but what the game EXACTLY pushed me through. Then the Player might notice t hat 'Saving' or 'Harvesting' Little Sisters delivered much the same 'rewards' ( the choice didn't really matter ). Then Atlas tells me : 'We' should kill Ryan, and lo and behold no option exists to get out of that ( Atlas conveniently also doesn't seem to do much towards that goal himself, nor much most of the rest of the time ). 
The 'Would You Kindly' did NOT affect me - I chose to be disgruntled at the general LACK of choices, and the SAME OLD linear game plot mechanism.
All this was well before 'the WYK Twist' reveal. A divergent ending (via 2 dif cutscenes - Wow !!) is actually dependent on the Player's saving/harvesting choice, which I would, in a minor way, consider it demonstrating 'control and influence'. ( 'Minor' because it didn't change anything where the Player had action Choice - It merely determines an 'END OF GAME' cutscene ).
--- --- ---
Morality-based Decision Storytelling - BS :
More than a few (typical) Players would happily machinegun every Little Sister in sight if that was how they got their ADAM to get their Plasmid toy/powers to play with. 
And the game designers knew this - the morality story thing didn't matter much-at-all to many computer game Players, and so they HAD TO reward Players for 'doing the right thing' ( saving Little Sisters ) to facilitate more Players to 'do the right thing' AND not get penalized for it in gameplay ( When 'saving' earned you no ADAM when you did not 'harvest' them ).
Thus the gamewriters must reward the toys No Matter What. Choice without ramifications, wouldn't it be amazing if the Real World operated like that ?
--- --- ---
Choiceless ?
Originally Levine planned for the BioShock game to have only one ambiguous ending ( instead of 2 ambiguous endings ), which kindof puts the (much touted) 'Choice' thing out of his original intentions. So, give credit to the company, and NOT to the game's primary designer.
--- --- ---
Choice To Kill Big Daddies :
The Player is forced into making assumptions about the Big Daddies. Rapture was about individual choice so it would be upto them and NOT YOU ( a 4 year old mutant high on ADAM ) to decide their proper fate.
Consider that maybe releasing the Little Sisters from a 'Living Hell' via 'Harvesting' also might be the BEST case for them ??? Seriously, How would YOU know ?
YOU (Jack) are 'doing the bidding' of Atlas, who's Plan D was this bizarre complex gambit to KILL RYAN. When you finally get there, Ryan has his own Ideas.
--- --- ---
Ryan's CHOICE to Die ??? :
It didn't HAVE to happen that way. Atlas/Fontaine was cornered and about to be destroyed at that point, and for Ryan to atypically ( considering his life ) turn 'Surrender Monkey' was actually a rather bizarre unlikely thing - BUT the game writers made it that way for their strange game story and poignant endings.
--- --- ---
CHOICE To Follow Atlas ? :
Ryan was Order - Atlas was a terrorist leader murdering people in Rapture's streets and who only offered worthless parasite 'solutions' ( as in NO SOLUTION and no workable society ). The vast majority of the Citizens would NOT support Atlas or his criminal minions, and THEY would have destroyed those miscreants IF the writers had actually allowed things to resemble anything real and not be a bunch of shoddy Caricature BS suitable for a simpleton Slaughter-Fest game.
How could so many Objectivist-oriented Citizens have believed all that rot Atlas yammered at you. Strange that so many Players ignore that Fontaine even admits it was all a scam and he lied about most of what he told you.
----
----
CONCEPT : CHOICE -- Infinite Abandoned that Concept 
--- --- ---
It is pretty obvious that the bird/cage thing was SUPPOSED to be more in the Infinite BS game ( Some kind of "Player Choice" like you had (Sortof) in the previous BioShock games ). 
Probably, like so many things, Levine f*cked up what they had originally planned (repeatedly) and we only get SAD remnants of what might have been in a MUCH BETTER game.
'BRICKS OR CLOWN - Which will the Player Choose ?????
--- --- --- --- ---
.
.