Archibald said:
Are we so overflowing with CnC that we have come to the point where we are being so picky about it.
Seconded.
+1 in the real world. Also applies to Might & Magic 3
However, if we are engaging in that most noble of codexian intellectual pursuits (armchair RPG design), philosoraptoring about hypothetical RPG ideals and setting eternal principles of RPGness on lofty pedestals of soul-gorged vampiric dice... One can say that C&C is fake, badly done, missing the point, lacking essence etc. if:
1) ... it results in a cut-scene, which is the only (or major) consequence of the player choice. We may call it "story C&C" and argue about its rightful and justified place, but asymptotically following it leads to a Choose Your Own Adventure Picturebook (TM) or the the dreaded Interactive Uncanny Valley Movie Of Laughable Movieness (R). And yes, ending slides count too, and even Fallout the First is guilty of this in some (but not all) instances. Good to keep in mind if you're designing the Superior RPG Of The Future.
2) ... it includes a clearly optimal/rational choice, with other choices simply being bad Larp material in comparison (even if they would be all right on their own) - a.k.a. the Bioware school. For example, the player is given a choice between:
a) [Lawful Stupid] Sacrifice their most powerful magic item to fuel a ritual which saves the kingdom for a crisis. Material loss, but +1 reputation and special future treatment from the king and law enforcement (say, when they go to warn the king that one of his advisors is plotting against him, they are actually listened to - as opposed to being thrown out by default).
b) [Chaotic Selfish] Refuse to sacrifice anything, and take advantage of the crisis to steal another magic item from the royal armory. Material gain, but -1 reputation and the law enforcement is on the lookout for them in later stages of the game (making public appearances in the city ill-advised and complicating many later quests).
c) [The Chosen One Must Choose] Instead of sacrificing an artifact, it turns out a single eyelash from the character is enough to fuel the ritual and save the day. In addition to the reputation increase and future preferential treatment, the character's awesomeness is rewarded with a magic item from the royal armory. The scheming advisor drops their evil scheme, realizing that all of his efforts are futile when faced with such a shining beacon of awesomeness.
If you bother to give multiple choices at all, make sure they are not a game of "Guess behind which door have I hidden the goat (reload makes right!)"
3) ... it doesn't depend on the character's strengths and weaknesses (yes, characters are meant to have weak sides too, if you can imagine), or it marginalizes them.
For example, touting stealth characters as viable options in your game means that all quest have to have a sensible stealth route, and those that logically don't can be skipped by such characters without preventing further progress in the game. So, being able to sneak through the first 25% of the game and then being thrown into a mandatory melee fight - sucks. As does being a sorcerer blasting everything in his path to smithereens, but who is foiled by a magical plot-locked wooden gate (of greater fireball resistance).
This is arguably more about general gameplay than about C&C as an atomic element, but in essence it means that player choice and resulting consequences are interwoven into all aspects of the game, instead of being tacked-on every 4 hours or so when they reach the end of a chapter (or a corridor).
4) ... it doesn't further character development (which is NOT defined as "perpetually increasing numbers offsetting a linear increase in numerical challenge", since Doom also had those in the form of bigger guns and better armor). In this particular instance, increasing health, damage & armor are not considered character development (but a simple power increase). To use an arbitrary example sure to infuriate part of the audience, choosing Weapon Focus: Spear in D&D is character development (since it means the character will favor spears over other weapons, even if the axe they find has more "pluses", so it helps define and differentiate the character), while choosing Weapon Specialization: Spear later is not character development, but a simple power increase (on a previously chosen path).
Both story-wise and gameplay-wise, the game should ideally offer multiple viable paths a character can take. For the sake of the argument, let's stick to a simple & formulaic approach: story-wise, the game can be played in Lawful, Chaotic or Neutral fashion, while gameplay-wise it can be resolved by Combat, Stealth and Diplomacy.
Whichever approach the player chooses with a particular character should push the character further down the chosen path (with possible twists). Consistently choosing combat should lead to more and more combat options being available, while choosing stealth should improve whatever aspects of stealth your game system provides; consistently being chaotic should unlock story content unavailable otherwise etc. Please note that this doesn't mean a character must be 100% specialized in a single approach to succeed (since that is kinda boring), i.e. reasonable hybrids should be viable (75% stealth + 25% diplomacy etc.); however, a single character should be able to
master only a single approach (so hybridization comes at a price, unlike Morrowind et al).
If successfully sneaking through a heavily guarded fortress doesn't make your character more of "the guy who sneaks through heavily guarded fortresses" (however the game system represents those attributes), but just more all-around awesome (and better with swords and magic and engineering and charming the ladies too!), don't be surprised if it doesn't get the Noble RPG Ideals Seal of Approval. Similarly, if trying to stick to a neutral path has no effect on the story except to push the plot 3 Generic Plot Units forward, it's missing out on a lot of potential.
P.S. Obviously not talking about the Witcher, since I haven't played it. Also, I'm quite pessimistic about seeing many games implementing "real" C&C as opposed to the "fake" ones. But hell, if I prefer dark beer but find myself in a beer-unenlightened country that has only lagers, sure - I'll take what I can get; however this won't stop me from knowing and saying I prefer something else... Even if that "something" is virtually unknown on the current plane of existence, and I'm not quite sure are my ideas about it real or just a figment of imagination...