Single player games with branching narratives are often marketed as having meaningful choices, where the outcome of players’ choices affect the story. But when these games fail to deliver on their promise it allows for frustration and disappointment. To aid in avoiding this phenomenon, this study explores the ways different types of choices affect the narrative agency in non-linear, story-driven games by looking closer at one of them - Detroit: Become Human. By means of formal analysis, a framework is developed for identifying various definitions and prerequisites of different choice types. This framework is applied to the chapter Stormy Night to evaluate and measure gameplay data regarding choices. In addition to this method, an interview with the Lead Game Designer is conducted which gives valuable insight into the actual process behind designing the choices in Detroit: Become Human. The results show that the chapter’s choices are explicit in their design. Furthermore, there is noticeable ambiguity and subjectivity in how choices can be portrayed and perceived as meaningful. The interview suggests that different types of choices are better used at certain parts of a narrative. Noticeable from the interview, but not as detectable in the gameplay data, is that having diversity in choice types promotes meaningfulness. Implications of these findings suggest that the requirements for a game’s choices to be meaningful are choice type diversity and careful placement.