The relation between player and character

[Aperson]

So I was watching some Youtube videos and found an interesting video on Deltarune, in particular covering

Spoiler

the part where Kris rips your soul out of your body as if you're acting against their own will and elaborated upon how it was perhaps a commentary over player control over certain characters/

and it got me thinking about the relation between player and character.

 

We don't really give it much thought when playing games other than being told "you control this character, go out and do stuff." That's OK for games which don't have much of a plot but then you throw RPGs into the mix and instead of controlling a blank slate you might actually be controlling a character with their own personality and quirks that might not match up with yours.

 

In that situation the higher level of immersion required in these games has a simple solution, just put yourself in the game and make your own avatar. But not every game lets you do that, JRPGs almost require you to control a character that isn't your own. They have their own motivations and their own personalities and your connection just ends up being someone who controls that character. So clearly each game has a different intention.

 

But, you're going to like some games more than others so naturally, whether the developer intended it or not you're going to be invested in the game. If you're invested in the game then perhaps you see yourself as more than just someone controlling the character, you ARE the character. That leads into interesting conundrum, maybe the character is a different gender to you as a human being? Well... Metroid is a series that is most well known for having a female protagonist as well as having a strong sense of immersion but I think the main character being in a suit of armour makes it easier to seperate that from you so I don't think that's too much of a problem. But if you want to invest yourself in the character you're playing as... would you want to embody a character who for all intents and purposes is almost the complete opposite of you? Would the most masculine of gamers want to play as the most feminine of characters? I know, given the choice, I tend to pick male characters within a certain spectrum. As a major example I never play as Princess Peach in Mario Kart or Smash Bros (unless I'm trying to clear Classic Mode). I feel like in a multiplayer game you want a character that can represent yourself as well as having gameplay attributes that you like.

 

I realise I might have covered about half the talking points for this thread in this OP but I thought I'd open the topic up. What is the relation between you and the characters you are playing as? Are they just vessels for you to control as a seperate individual from them or are they someone that, while you are playing the game, you actually want to be?

[Ashley]

I don't really see myself in characters, even those where you're able to model them on you (with character design modes); they're just an avatar. 

However I do invest in characters where there's a decent plot or if I've just grown to like a character over time such as Kirby. I'm under no illusion he's at all like me, but I root for him. And if I can root for a pink all powerful blob I can root for pretty much anyone, even a woman. 

Although thinking about your Smash/Kart examples I mostly play as non-human characters anyway! Maybe I just don't want to be human? 🤔

[Glen-i]

47 minutes ago, Ashley said:

Although thinking about your Smash/Kart examples I mostly play as non-human characters anyway! Maybe I just don't want to be human? 🤔

This is usually me. And nothing accentuated that more then when I played Skyrim.

"Oh, so each of these races have different strengths and weaknesses? That's pretty neat, I wonder which I should... Woah! Hold up! There's lizard people in this!?"

And then I picked the lizard dude. Game was boring open-world tripe, but the novelty of it was nice for a little while. Not enough fantasy set games give you non-human choices.

I also agree that I don't see myself in characters. Even when I make a custom one that I will try to make look like me. The established characters are always more interesting to me anyway.

Take Dragon Quest XI, Hero is a typical mute DQ protagonist, but much like the rest of that series, his companions carry the plot, and they're more interesting to me as a result.

If a game encourages me to make choices, well, I'll almost always be unable to resist the rule of funny. Which is not at all how I'd act in real life.

 

Edited November 14, 2021 by Glen-i

[Cube]

I always see characters as someone else's story. When a game lets you create a character, I'll create someone I think is interesting, rather than trying to make "me". I'll often play games as female characters, and in games with multiple species, I generally don't choose a human character. I quite like the "underdog" trope, so often will choose the most oppressed species (like city elf in Dragon Age).

 

I do find that in some first person games where you create a character (such as Elder Scrolls), I often just forget who my character is because there's so little in the way of defining traits for the character and the dialogue is always fairly generic to cater to all choices. In those, I fell more like the character is just a blank featureless slate more than me inserting myself into the character. 

[Jonnas]

It's an interesting topic. The player is always going to decide everything the protagonist does, so naturally, conversations about this connection should be had.

In my view, the protagonist will always have their own personality. That's the base understanding I approach with every game, anyway, Mario is always going to be an upbeat everyman, Sonic will always be a semi-edgy cool dude, Mega Man will always be a typical by-the-numbers good guy, etc.

If the game wants the player to feel connected to the protagonist, that game has to earn it, go full in on the concept. By that I mean, actually let the player know that the main character's choices are your choices, and that they matter. Give the main character sufficient questions on what they want to do, and actually respect them: don't ask me if I want to kick a puppy if you have no intention of letting me kick it! This doesn't just go for dialogue choices, I mean, if there's a "kick" button, and a doggy is running around, then what happens when you try to kick it shall speak volumes about how much freedom of choice you actually have in that game.

If the game doesn't allow for that much freedom, the player will have no choice but to interpret the main character as its own entity within the world. For a concrete example, the protagonists of Yakuza cannot harm bystanders (a natural consequence of the main characters' personality and moral code), whereas the protagonists of GTA can do so with ease (a natural consequence of letting players do whatever they want in a sandbox environment). The main takeaway from this is that Kazuma Kiryu is a fleshed out character, while I'll be surprised if any GTA fan remembers anything from Tommy Vercetti's personality.