Detroit Rocks and Sucks
2026-02-19
Detroit Become Human is a weird game. It was a game that made me think about it more than many other game. Each story beat I could recall despite the intertwining of the three characters which I would say it’s an indication of how much of an impression it gave me. It also simultaneously managed to offended me for how bad it was at times and made me smile for how genius other moments were. I think I stand close to what how most people see the game, polarizing, to say the least. but id like to get into the specifics on what I liked and didn’t like.
To begin, a common criticism of Quantic Dreams games, or any game that gives players any decision making is the “illusion of choice”, meaning players are presented with many options but these decisions are inconsequential. In other words these choices ultimately have no meaningful influence on how the story moves. I must defend Detroit from this criticism because the game isn’t meant to be played with this mindset. The linearity of the story can be exposed by the branches that the game displays when a player completes a chapter- it starts with a single node, expands into many nodes, then either converges back to a single node or sprouts into many different endings but upon closer inspection, they are usually shades of the same outcome. Players may see the game as a choose your own adventure game where they have the freedom to explore whichever path they want and witness the concequences of their actions, but I believe the game never had the intention of giving that experience in the first place. It is rather encouraging the player to interact within this linear narrative and asks a more interesting question of “if you were in this situation, how would YOU approach it?”
What the game really excels at is making players dwell on interesting moral dilemmas in such predetermined stories. Because the game has such a strong stance on certain themes, players may notice an unspoken “right choice” that progresses the story in a meaningful way. The game on the other hand fails to explore these interesting themes when the player is given freedom of choice because these “incorrect” choice tends to only satiate the players’ morbid curiosity.
Take Markus’ story. It is predetermined that he starts a revolution. The game is not interested in asking the pointless question- do you start a revolution or not? It instead presupposes the player will start a revolution and asks a more interesting question- if you were to start a revolution, in what fashion will do you do it? The 3 main protagonists share a similar amount of freedom in terms of story progression- they have a motive that drives the story forward, they are put in situations where the player must decide how they will overcome this through interactive gameplay, then the themes emerge from contemplating on why the player chose to do certain things, although this last point’s effectiveness varies greatly by character.
The strength of forcing players to juggle moral dilemmas is perhaps showcased best from a rather subtle interaction between Connor and Hank.
A chase breaks out between a crow deviant and Connor. A long interactive chase plays out and at the end, the player is given two choices- save Hank, who is grabbing onto a ledge about to fall off, or continue chasing after the deviant who may hold vital information about the active case. Interestingly, Hank’s survival rate is displayed, a generous 88%. I think the intended experience is to go after the deviant as the player is so emotionally invested in the chase that they cannot give up, plus 88% is a very generous survival rate, Hank can handle himself. After the deviant commits suicide, Hank’s reaction to your choice touches on the core theme of the game. He is in anger, accusing Connor of seeing people only as statistic, and this is truly the meat of the game- when these choices explores the nuanced themes through dilemmas and choices. Because the game makes the player emotionally invested in chasing the deviant through the dozen quick time event leading up to that pivotal choice, the player is not merely role playing or pretending to be Connor, they immerse themselves into another character and think to themselves, “Yes, I did see Hank as a statistic for a second there. I thought like an android through sheer instinct and now understand both Connor and Hank’s worldview.”
It is also important to point out that this small interaction does not affect the story in a “meaningful” way that the typical user wants, because their fixation is the outcome and not the choice itself (in this case it would be “regardless if I save Hank or not, the deviant will commit suicide anyways and not “I chose to save/not save Hank for these reasons”). Because Coonor and Hank’s relationship isn’t a perfect line but instead valleys of connection and tension, even the cheesy climax later in the story where Hank is challenged to figure out who the real Connor is between 2 identical androids are so endearing, Connor’s transformation into a human feels deserved. Simply put, choices are meaningful not because the story simply changes, but it allows us to experience the lives of these androids or humans and understand the situation through interactive stories.
The game usually becomes uninteresting when the player is offered many choices, but apart from the unspoken “right” choice, the others are so out of place, so irrelevant to what the game is trying to convey that as mentioned before, it gives players freedom for the sake of morbid curiosity and not a challenge in moral thinking. Kara’s story is the weakest of the 3 protagonists because her motive is so strong in the opening chapter that she has no moral grey zone to navigate. The player is given choices from time to time, but it usually boils down to A. Be nice to Alice or B. Kick her. From a narrative perspective, there is no incentive to be cold towards Alice other than “I wonder what happens if I am mean to her” and presents meaningless suffering and cannot explore the grey zone that Connor needs to tread who is struggling to find his identity as an android. Markus stands in the middle as his story is predetermined and will start a revolution regardless of how the player does things but lacks any nuanced self reflection on his motives.
Now that we’ve established Detroit’s strengths and intention, let’s explore its themes. To start, the attempt at depoliticizing a political conflict is the largest glaring issue with the game. The game presents a backdrop of potentially interesting philosophical themes of artificial intelligence, identity, what it means to be human or to feel emotion, or the political issues that both androids and humans are facing, evident in the opening acts where Todd is presented in a subtly sympathetic light as he and many other humans have been displaced by androids, or the discrimination that Markus faces, the game neglects to engage with these themes in any deeper way and simply calls for sympathy towards androids through cherry picked situations to conjure up emotion. It suffers from the same problem of Bioshock Infinite where it presents overtly political imagery that were inspired by real life, but fails to articulate or expand upon such ideas. Simply put, they were integral to the message of the story, but it was explored only as surface level aesthetic.
The game asks the question, “what if androids became sentient? Will you give it equal rights as humans?” but fails spectacularly at presenting any compelling arguments for why the player should agree with this statement as it only throws the androids into traumatic situations and yells “they are human because they show emotion and have autonomy”. What could’ve been an interesting existential exploration of self when Connor sees his double, or the guilt that any of the Androids feel when they witness their creator mega-corporation displacing entire human communities like Todd, or the climate crisis that forced zoos to adopt android animals, it depoliticizes these overly political issues and relies on hippie-like pacifism and claim that we simply need to set politics aside and love each other to overcome prejudice.
Markus would be much more interesting as a character if he had any doubts about whether if the revolution was truly something that was justified, but it makes for awkward parallels with the Black Lives Matter movement that it tries to draw, which is a common criticism with how it handles real life political references with the fictional sci-fi setting. The story itself, while not as compelling as Connor, is fairly straightforward- is violence justified when standing up against oppression? How many sacrifices are you willing to make to make your point? Although I believe the game excels at exploring these shorthand emotions to think about, if we were to strictly talk about the political themes in the story, the game does not attempt to interrogate what Jericho is standing up for and assumes that the androids are truly doing something good. It does not present any arguments from the humans side on why androids should not be given equal rights or why androids are hated in the first place. It does not challenge the definition of what means to feel emotion or what it means to be human.
Simply put, the game’s fundamental message (Androids should be treated like humans) is flawed, while it’s not impossible to convey this point, in fact it could’ve been a potentially powerful message, it fails to present any reasonable arguments for why the player should agree. Love will prevail, but will it solve economic disparity? The androids are smiling, but will it solve climate change and android replacing nature? The androids are expressing suffering, but will it solve the radical changes in law that defines what is human? It handles sensitive topics without any sensitivity for what these imagery means in real life, or make any interesting progression in such discussions.
To specifically quote David Cage, “The story I’m telling is really about androids…They’re discovering emotions and wanting to be free. If people want to see parallels with this or that, that’s fine with me. But my story’s about androids who want to be free.” is very much a reflection of the justified criticism that game is given.