Great Game Characters Compensate For Plot? 46
Thanks to the IGDA for their 'Culture Clash' column discussing why interesting game characters make for better games, even if those games have a weak plot. The author gives the intriguing example of Max Payne, suggesting the game is memorable, despite the "relatively cliched" story, because "...the first time we see Max, he's giving up smoking because it's bad for his baby. The second time, he's howling his misery over the loss of his wife. He is a human being with a broken soul, and an enormously compelling and emotionally engaging character." However, games such as Morrowind present the main character as "little more than a cipher through which we experienced the game's story", and it's suggested that this is less successful: "It can be an effective way to craft a powerful narrative, but it's also one that is more likely to fail if poorly executed."
RPGs? (Score:3, Insightful)
I have to agree. With many RPGs where you generate your own character (ie Baldur's Gate, Morrowind, etc.) the main character lacks any identity and it's hard for me as a player to instill any identity in the character I'm playing - it just feels too... well, contrived.
This doesn't apply to all RPGs tho - Planescape Torment had a very intriguing character!
Re:RPGs? (Score:2, Insightful)
Characters in video games are mostly dull. In fact if someone said "Quick, name a character from a PC game", the only memorable one for me is Kerrigan in Starcraft. (Memorable for spoilerish reasons that, despite the game being a fair few years old, I won't spoil for anyone).
I fail to see how Max
Re:RPGs? (Score:2, Insightful)
Except for Planescape:Torment. A character is pre-made for you. You will develop it over time, but you have a name ("nameless one") and an appearance (boy he's ugly). Talking about P:T would be a bit off-topic here. After all, it is a great game with a great plot AND great characters.
RPGs (in the broader sense) with bad plots can be enjoyable, however. Diablo 2 has a great replay value, because a character can develop in several ways. An amaz
Re:RPGs? (Score:2)
Phew!
"Quick, name a character from a PC game"
Actually, there is quite a list I could name. And I am bad with names. IMHO, the real factor is that most story lines are repeating (aliens invade earth etc.), so there is only the "lead character" to spice things up (enter Duke Nukem).
Furthermore, for which kind of games do you really need a story? While all FPS have one (more or less), it's basically all about pulling the trigger a
Re:RPGs? (Score:2, Insightful)
Well, if you look in the adventure genre, it's easy, but that's a genre with really strong characters and stories, because they don't try to be open ended.
From just the Moneky Island series alone I can come up with dozens of names, Guybrush Threepwood, Elaine Marley, The Dread Pirate LeChuck, Wally, Largo, Murray the talking Skull, I. Chesse, etc.
Maybe I'm kind of a bad example t
Re:RPGs? (Score:1)
Re:RPGs? (Score:1)
Nameless space marine, 'Marathon' series. ~_^
Re:RPGs? (Score:1)
> in Out Of This World (Conrad)
No, that is wrong. His name is Lester Knight Chaykin. You must be thinking of Conrad B. Hart, from 'FlashBack'. Although these games were made by the same company (Delphine Software), they were not related.
Re:RPGs? (Score:1)
I probably also lose points for remembering the name of Mesmeron from the Pac-Man cartoon show.
Re: (Score:1)
Re:RPGs? (Score:4, Insightful)
--trb
Re:RPGs? (Score:1)
Re:RPGs? (Score:1)
(Going off topic here) While it's a great idea to level up skills based on use, it didn't work in Morrowind because of a loop hole you could use to maximize your skills. Basically, if you didn't engage your character until you had sufficient levels in your desired skills, then you could *always* get +5 in three areas. I became obsessed with this and ignored t
Re:RPGs? (Score:3, Informative)
Dude, that's the whole point!
Morrowind is an RPG in the truest pen-and-paper sense. The whole point is that the character's identity and future is entirely determined by you, the player.
IMHO, it's the games like Diablo that are a tragic misuse of the term RPG, since there isn't any actual Role Playing (you know, the "RP" in "RPG"). Contrast with Morrowind, where the Role Playing
Re:RPGs? (Score:2)
Re:RPGs? (Score:1)
Wow... (Score:4, Interesting)
This is also the problem with MMORPGs -> Most aren't built to tell a story, rather they're there to help you scratch your head and think what to do somewhere else than everyday life.
Somewhere along the line games developers must realise that if players play these games to escape, to be entertained - then they don't want to have to find ways within the game to entertain themselves. Games that implement these engaging story arcs are almost always extremely successful - even if only on a small cult level.
It's also the reason why James Cameron movies are always 10x better than any others.
Re:Wow... (Score:1)
Carboard Cutouts abound (Score:2, Funny)
Well, to hell with you. I'm off to ogle Miss BloodRayne for a bit more.
Re:Carboard Cutouts abound (Score:1)
scantily-clad warrior-maiden with 10,000 polygon boobs
That's an awful lot of boobs. Seriously though, although sex will always sell games, those games are the ones which you play because you want to look AT them, not play because you want to become immersed in them, part of them. There's a difference between a hot female and compelling narrative.Re:Carboard Cutouts abound (Score:2)
Depending on your definition of "compelling", I can see these two things going very well together. Hell, throw in five of each and it will work even better!
Re:Carboard Cutouts abound (Score:1)
Character != Player (Score:3, Interesting)
Supposedly this is the big difference between interactive media, role playing, and other such as books, movies, etc. where you experience vicariously through the character.
Re:Character != Player (Score:2)
On the other hand, in (for example) Lovecraft's writing, the story's frequently being told to you by the character who experienced it. In that case, an interesting character can be a big plus.
Avatars in the modern RPG (Score:4, Insightful)
This may be less successful as a standard "character", but that in no way means it should not be done. I personally prefer characters as ciphers, this allows me to become that character. As the article mentioned, the player is no longer watching another being experience this other world while playing out a story; the player *is* that character within that world, and creating that story.
The article is fair enough to mention that the typical "character driven" games like Max Payne (and unlike Morrowind) make for better "narratives" but this is the folly of many game analysts in assuming that all games are driven by narrative. While narrative plays a major part in moving the plot along, a game like Morrowind could easily be considered a simulation of sorts.
Either way, this is highly a matter of taste. I certainly hope I don't see less of this kind of game, and more of the currently popular polygonal cliches, that walk through several hours of cutscenes and constantly spout endlessly repetitive one-liners during gameplay. (Contrary to what I assume is popular belief, constant jabbering by the on screen player characters does not add personality).
Re:Avatars in the modern RPG (Score:5, Insightful)
Which is fine, until you come across a conversation essential to moving the plot forwards, in which there are no alternatives presented that match your envisioned character. Or you find that your character can't really toss in his lot with the Evil Sorcerer, as he would really like to do.
I commented on this before, waaaaaaay back, when people were bitching about the lack of flexibility in the Japanese-style RPGs like Final Fantasy.
Basically, there's a dichotomy in computer RPGs. On the one hand, you have the plot-driven games, like Baldur's Gate, Icewind Dale, etc. These are the ones that present the characters as mere ciphers. The problem is, even if you really get into the character, as you can in tabletop gaming, the system is not flexible enough to take into account your background. Why does my elven ranger, whose parents were brutally murdered by a bunch of bloodthirsty human peasants not treat humans like scum? Because the background you write for your characters has absolutely no effect on the game. In this sort of a game, the player can mould the character however they wish, but the character may not always fit well into the game.
On the other hand, you have the character-oriented RPGs like Final Fantasy. Here your choice is taken away from you - you can't play Final Fantasy 7 as a 4-foot black midget, you're gonna have to play as a spikey-haired white guy. But because the programmers know what sort of personality each character has, they can program the game so that Cloud acts like Cloud, Squall acts like Squall, and whoever the guy is in FFX acts like himself too. In this genre, the player is forced into the mould of a particular character, but that character fits in well within the game.
Now, with the advent of Neverwinter Nights, and such games, we are getting closer; the re-introduction of a GM brings back the flexibility of a human intelligence. But until we can make a program capable of understanding a natural language, and being able to rewrite the script of a game on the fly on the basis of deducations made from information inferred from a natural language, we're going to be stuck with this dichotomy in single-player RPGs. Whichever flavour you choose is based entirely on personal preferrence; would you rather choice in character design, or a set of smoothly integrated predefined characters?
Anyone trying to start a RPG holy war proclaiming one of these as the only true way just doesn't get this; each type of game is following a different subset of the RPG ethos, and with current technology, it is just not possible to combine the two totally.
Well... (Score:1)
Characters plot (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Characters plot (Score:4, Interesting)
Even Max Payne, which was the article's first mention of strong character, is every bit as derivative as the plot, and his character is developed primarily through the story.
Some basic social psychology can tell us (or, more importantly, artists) that designing the character's image in certain ways can project feelings onto the viewer, without knowing anything about that character, and both Nintendo and Sega used this well in their games, but in the end the story tells the tale. Sonic's sharp lines project his attitude, while Mario's round-ness projects a likeable character. Disney uses similar ideas in their animation, and Pixar has translated this into the computer-generated arm of animation. Shrek is an ogre, a creature that would normally be depicted as a scary, vile, disgusting creature, instead we get a round character with story points that emphasize no matter how hard he tries, no one's going to think he's scary or vile (though perhaps disgusting all the same). Try to count how many Disney villains have pointy chins or noses and thin, tall bodies with sharp lines. These things are important to get a point across at a glance, but are always developed by story.
If you're the kind of person that wants a strong connection with the characters in your game, than perhaps you'll like games that center on them, but without a plot to develop the character, that character is simply what you project onto them.
For advertising and to get people interested you may use a strong image to project your character, and it is important that the image and the plot that develops that character mesh well together, but if the story isn't there, or just doesn't develop the character, than the image will be all you have.
link! (Score:1)
Basically, it comes down to this. Great play mechanics are first and most important. But a good character can make up for other lacking areas, such
Comparing to movies... (Score:1)
Well, if it's cliched, you *need* to do that... (Score:1)
Max Payne and all the movies and other games based off the same premise always struck me as another contender for the title of "the guy's version of a soap opera" - it's not the situation at all, but the characters that drive it. It's not the point that there's some love affair going on, or ass is being kicked, but *who*
Word... (Score:3, Insightful)
The same goes for great anime - sure you may have liked Vandread or Gatekeepers or any of the recent spate of mass-production animes. But the reason everyone recognizes the names Ayanami Rei and Spike Spiegel is that the characters in Eva and Bebop are vivid, larger-than life characters that we all connect with on a deep level.
Great literature is the same way - from Arthur to Yossarian, Hamlet to Holden, great characters are what connect us to and captivate us with any story.
Re:Word... (Score:1)
Re:Word... (Score:1)
Re:Word... (Score:2)
Pre-Playstation video games were shunned like the plague wrapped around Barbie dolls with their heads ripped off and replaced with GI-Joe action figure heads. People need to stop comparing the outcast days of the SNES/Genesis and earlier days of gaming from the PS1/N64 days. If you walked into a public place, beside from a local video game store, and randomly started talking about how long it took you to beat a Megaman game, people avoided
old man murray... (Score:4, Interesting)
Why do people always criticize games for their lack of plot but we never criticize films for their lack of interactivity?
I popped the Wizard of Oz in my ps2 last night and no matter how hard I tried I couldn't get that girl to go off the yellow brick road. I kept hitting buttons but they didn't seem to have any effect on the movie at all except to pause it and skip ahead.
graphics 10
gameplay 0
score 2
Re:old man murray... (Score:2)
The correct answer: not really (Score:2)
These articles are stupid.
Does good audio make up for bad graphics?
Does a good learning curve make up for cancelled online features?
Come on, can't you see how useless this is?
No. (Score:2)
Just the opposite (Score:1)
People interested in character development should go read a book. They might see how shallow the stories in games really are.
Max BS (Score:1)
I mean Duke Nukem was a great character, and all he had going for him was a butch h
RPG's with lack of identity? (Score:1)