The concept of a 'character', or a 'well rounded character' or 'good character development' is fundamentally tied into those mediums though. The video game didn't re-invent characterisation, it's initial lack of personality was due to technical restraints, not artistic choice. Otherwise what else can we possibly be judging these characters on? If it's the enjoyment we associate with the context we experience them in, it's not really a reflection on the character, is it? The least we can say for these guys is that they don't impede the enjoyment of the wider game.Danm_999
I think the first idea is the key point. Characters are fundamental to other mediums, but not video games. I would argue that lack of personality was not due to technical restraints, because you have those old-school text adventures that could write you a character to death. I simply think characterization is just not a big deal when it comes to games. While I know a lot of people here pride in their awesome characters and awesome stories, a lot of the games I see quoted for these supposed stories and characters are actually pretty decent games in their own right.
If anyone was truly playing games for stories and characters, they'd probably be playing adventure games or something as 'boring' and 'stale' as that genre. Yes, the adventure genre is my favourite genre of all time :)
Really though, characters are an extension of game design. It's the other way around for most other mediums (not brought up in the modern/post-modern age), especially film and television; how many no-name directors come and go from network tv series, it certainly wouldn't matter if there are likeable characters in the series.
Back on point, I'd say a fair chunk of those that play (J)RPGs and say they play it for the story are..... playing it for the game. I mean, I doubt you'd find it all that interesting if you couldn't grind, couldn't equip items, couldn't fight strategic battles etc.
-
I tend to judge video game characters on the merits they have as a video game device. For the most part, VG protagonists are an extension of the player onto the video game world; our disbelief isn't suspended unless we have an avatar representing ourselves. The most basic principles for that are direct input: if you press forward, your character moves forward, or click a button and he/she shoots like you intended. How detached would you feel from the video game world if you couldn't even control your character properly? There are some horrible 90's PC games that could prove that point.
Then there are those that go above and beyond the call of duty to remark your input, or lack thereof. When Alyx mentions that Gordon is a man of few words, or when in Episode One she does that little prank with you and your flashlight; the latter is a better example of when a game asked you to complete an obstacle, and then in some way makes a comment on your participation in said obstacle. Niko Bellic, as I've stated before, has been created with this in mind. Pretty much everything he says about the present and the future has something to do with your restricted input (shoot, kill, drive) and the context of the setting (Liberty City). The standout idea that lingers in my mind is the idea of money and GTA: money has always been intertwined with the design, and Niko pretty much says in every mission that all he's doing the mission for is the money. You got the most wildest supporting cast with all these ulterior motives and zany outbursts, and it's as if Niko sympathizes with the player because all the player can do is observe the world.... and shoot, kill and drive to obtain money. Niko's character is somewhat restricted to the game's design, but he sure as hell doesn't feel like it, which is why I think he's the best character yet.
That's how I tend to judge video game characters anyway. I think we're all instinctively drawn to RPGs for character customization and FPSs for their faceless hero advantage, because those are particular tricks to help you 'get into' the character, so I've tried to rationalize that instinct.
Log in to comment