Role-playing Games and the Problem of Sympathetic Characters

WorstUsernameEver

WorstUsernameEver

But best title ever!
The folks at "The Problem With Story" have penned a brief editorial dedicated to what they feel are some design decisions that make it difficult for the player to feel sympathy for your characters in role-playing games. It's not Fallout-centric, but it uses Fallout 3 as the primary examples and touches on some subjects that I'm sure some people here are interested in, so here's a snip:<blockquote>Why? What is it that whenever my character is killed or damaged, I have absolutely no concern for his wellbeing?

It’s because the character building aspects of role-playing games are fundamentally broken and prevent sympathy from the player.

Consider what I’ve done with the character so far. I’ve created a façade for him, which is nothing more than an appearance. The fundamental nature of the role playing game is that you create a personality through your reactions to other NPCs, but even then, sympathy is hard to come by.

The character here is nothing but an avatar. When I respond to the Megaton sheriff asking me whether I can diffuse the bomb in the middle of tomb, I’m not responding whether my character can do it. No, instead, I’m wondering whether I, Patrick Stafford, can do it.

[...]

Perhaps we don’t play RPGs for rich characterisation. That’s fine. It’s been that way for years. But it can be done. Notwithstanding Mass Effect’s shortcomings, it places the player inside the middle of the action but without the abandonment Fallout 3 uses to create immersion.

Instead, we see your own face, reflect on the tone in your voice and become more of a puppet master than an avatar for your decisions. You’re here controlling the action in every conversation, but you’re not necessarily a part of it.</blockquote>Thanks RPGWatch.
 
Well, with DnD, death has an actual effect. Your character actually dies. (unless you find some way to bend that)

When most games have a continue option on the game over screen, it really eliminates any sort of penalty from "death" besides having to replay a certain scene.
 
I think the best roleplaying games allow you to create a character, and for me this is not merely an extension of myself, but rather an invention of which I do indeed care about.

I definitely cared about my character in fallout 2, whether I was playing a psychopathic murderer, or the savior of the wasteland--although each in some way might be an extension of myself, I definitely don't see them as mirror images.

I think what makes you care about your character is just how good the game and the story is. Even in a game like Final Fantasy VII where you have virtually no control over the decisions your character makes, I definitely felt concern for their well-being because they were well developed and likeable.
 
WelcomeToNewReno said:
When most games have a continue option on the game over screen, it really eliminates any sort of penalty from "death" besides having to replay a certain scene.
Click to expand...

Exactly. Usually, I take even the biggest risk in games because I know I can always reload. Doubt anything like that would happen in life.

Funny thing is it's pretty damn hard to make a situation in a RP game where you care for your character because it requires a head-on plot while totally controlling the protagonist to give you a worrying feel.
 
Man, this guy openly admits to hating RPG's but then writes a column about it? Strange.

But to be fair, he is sort of right about this game and the other games he mentions. But what he doesn't realize is that those games don't have good writing or characters to begin with. As I play through Gothic, I find myself instantly attached to the Nameless Hero and his adventures. I feel like him and yet I realize he is his own character. It's a great mix that I've never felt in that type of Action/RPG before. Man, and Bethesda makes the big hits yet Piranha Bytes lives in obscurity?
Another great example of a connectable PC is definitely the Nameless One.

I think the issue is that many RPG's don't write the PC with any personality at all. Fallout 3, NV and Skyrim all have very neutral dialogue choices with a few evil and good choices for that moral ambiguity.

But then there are games where the game success in letting your carve your own path yet still allow some personality to appear from your choices. Games like Planescape where the Nameless One is sort of stoic, yet lost and a bit sarcastic. Or Gothic where the Nameless Hero is a smart mouthed asshole with good intentions. Fallout 2 manages to bring some personality to the character as well. Sometimes the Chosen one is a bit naive and a bit sarcastic. He has a goals and motivation but it's ultimately up to you to choose his intentions and actions to achieve these goals. It's just a difference between quality writing.
 
The character here is nothing but an avatar. When I respond to the Megaton sheriff asking me whether I can diffuse the bomb in the middle of tomb, I’m not responding whether my character can do it. No, instead, I’m wondering whether I, Patrick Stafford, can do it.
Click to expand...

Rarely do you see someone miss the point of role playing games by this wide a margin.
 
Re: Role-playing Games and the Problem of Sympathetic Charac

I guess since he doesn't play many RPGs it makes him the most qualified to write an article on how fundamentally broken character building is in the RPG genre.
 
This writer has never visited the imagi-nation. RPG stands for Role Playing Game. You assume the role of a character and play that person in the game. He displays a lack of any ability to put himself in someone elses shoes in a game. That probably means he has a severe lack of empathy in the real world as well. He's not the right person to judge RPGs.
 
Well, this guy doesn't know how to play RPGs, and so don't 95% of the population, including game developers, from what I'm led to believe.

You don't role-play your self, you role-play your character. You don't need sympathy, you need cold calculism /or however it's said). That's role-play!

Richwizard said:
This writer has never visited the imagi-nation. RPG stands for Role Playing Game. You assume the role of a character and play that person in the game. He displays a lack of any ability to put himself in someone elses shoes in a game. That probably means he has a severe lack of empathy in the real world as well. He's not the right person to judge RPGs.
Click to expand...
Hum... I'm inclined to agree.
 
I liked this comment:

“The lack of audio responses in games such as Fallout 3, Dragon Age and older RPGs such as Baldur’s Gate may be part of the avatar experience, but they also are a critical roadblock in the attempt to make characters more sympathetic.”

You cant be serious, going there, can you ? Good storytelling, from your words, equals to voice acting. Huh. I’m guessing you dont own any books, are you
Click to expand...


:clap:
 
He did post a followup/response Sympathetic characters...a response where he clarifies some of his points. Apparently he does know how to play a RPG but chose the mindset of someone who wasn't used to RPG's (Megaton Sheriff example).

I don't agree that a voiced protagonist is a requirement or guarantee for an avatar that you really care about. He uses Mass Effect as an example of how a fully voiced avatar is more immersive but I can't say that I fully agree with that.

In Mass Effect I felt like each conversation had at most three different approaches/roles:
Luke Skywalker, Admiral Ackbar or Emperor Palpatine. personally I would have liked to play Commander Shepherd as something entirely else; maybe a mixture of Han Solo, Bobba Fett and Nameless Wanderer. What about a playthrough as Tina Turner's character in Mad Maxx? And why couldn't I pick a different name?

If the avatar is going to be fully voiced I want to have several different voices to choose from, like in Baldur's Gate, but I don't think we're going to see that in the current generation of video games.
 
DustyTraveller said:
In Mass Effect I felt like each conversation had at most three different approaches/roles
Click to expand...

All with the same outcome. No matter if you threaten or beg, you'll have it. Really why people click randomly when playing RPGs, as the author suggests - who cares what you say as long as you get the same stuff?
 
As other folks have said, it depends on the quality of said RPG (mainly dialogue, character development, story, etc).

For me, the biggest draw is if a protagonist can relate to me and hwo the world can react to his actions. The more complex choices in regards to both story and dialogue, the more realistic the protagonist can be. How does he handle situations out of dialogue? How does he speak? What kind of personality does he have? How has his past affected him in the present day?

The more options available, the more one can tailor their hero to better relate.
 
My character in KOTOR 1 & 2 never said a damn thing, but i was definately completely immersed in that world, and the path I had chosen with it's effect on the NPCs and situations I encountered.

On dead is dead gaming: I wish more game makers would have this as an option. An option, not a requirement, DiD is not for everyone. I've tried a few DiD campaigns in Silent Hunter 4, and it definately ramps up the tension. My heart sank as my boat sank... But thats a military sub simulation, there is no story. Imagine a game like Assassins Creed or Dead Space with built in DiD option. Or, scarier still, a 60 hour RPG! Controller/monitor/keyboard sales would go up, thats for damn sure. :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top