Gavinmad
Mr. Poopybutthole
- 42,532
- 50,757
Because nobody has actually supplied any other silent protagonist examples aside from Half Life? I said Mario RPG and Chrono Trigger as a joke.
Dragon Age: Inquisition (Plot Details in Spoilers!)
- Thread starter Eonan
- Start date
Is there a form of storytelling where the man character doesn't talk or emote throughout the entire story?
Tuco
I got Tuco'd!
- 45,505
- 73,597
My thoughts on the matter:
1. The only way to really max out player involvement with the game's story is to have a fully voiced protagonist who is very active in the dialog scenes and where the dialog scenes greatly impact the gameplay and story through the game.
2. If you have a strong protagonist (hawke, shep, niko(gtaIV)) you run the risk of annoying the player by taking control away from them(My biggest problem is when the hero is largely reactive and has no plans, options or goals of his own) and by annoying the player if your team isn't talented enough to do it very well. (Most gamers find shitty writing more tolerable if it's not their character saying the dumb things).
3. Sandbox games or silent protagonists can definitely elicit emotional attachment from the player. Whether specific games do or not is player preference and contingent on the games themselves. Personally I have a lot of attachment to TES3 and 5, but not so much to 4 (3/5 were much better than 4 in most aspects). Ex: The last quest I finished in Skyrim was in some shit village where a kid wants to be an adventurer. I can either tell him to farm mud, or persuade/buy/intimidate his father into accepting his son's wishes. If I go through with it and come back the kid will be clad in armor and have enough renown to be named Eric the Slayer or whatever. I love that shit.
4. I think Bioware has shown that player attachment to the story is mostly tied to the lives and futures of the closest NPCs that the player comes across. Even more so if those NPCs are companions.
5. Pursuant to the last point, the best instances of storytelling have:
A. Elements that are decided by player choice (And real choice, not two ostensibly divergent paths that merge at the first opportunity.
B. Affects the gameplay in a significant way.
C. Involve NPCs that the player has an attachment to.
D. Use a fully voiced hero the player fits into.
The above listing is why the Tuchanka scene in ME3 is the best storytelling in a game ever. Everything from the clutch ride with Wrex to the final destination of Mordin was A+ quality, but also A: player's choice has a massive impact on the scene, B: the primary gameplay elements are driven by the story (is Wrex/Mordin with you), C: Finish the story of the top squad mates in the game (wrex/mordin) and the entire thing is made possible only by the heroic actions of the player.
That's also why the ending to ME3 was such a huge disappointment. Once you say goodbye to all your buddies in the most forced dialog ever, there's almost none of the above list in it.
I don't know when Bioware stopped doing little scenes or at least dialogue at the end of a game or series arc to tell you what impact your actions had on all the characters you cared about and NPCs in the game. I always loved this. Not having it in mass effect was a kick in the balls. I'd have far preferred it to the 'lol stranded all your favorite NPCs on a deserted jungle planet.'
Having even a blurb of dialogue for each major NPC, race, etc. would have almost made up for the shitty anticlimactic reaper ending on the end-a-tron 3000.
Baldur's Gate 2 did an amazing job of this, Neverwinter Nights Hordes of the Underdark did a fantastic job of it, Dragon Age 1 did a pretty good job of it. And after that.....nothing, why the fuck would they stop doing what works?
Having even a blurb of dialogue for each major NPC, race, etc. would have almost made up for the shitty anticlimactic reaper ending on the end-a-tron 3000.
Baldur's Gate 2 did an amazing job of this, Neverwinter Nights Hordes of the Underdark did a fantastic job of it, Dragon Age 1 did a pretty good job of it. And after that.....nothing, why the fuck would they stop doing what works?
Cantatus
Lord Nagafen Raider
- 1,437
- 79
Mass Effect 3 did this to some extent. It didn't exactly go into much depth of what happens with your crew, but you get a good indication for at least a few of them.
Well, more like DLC, but it is one of the biggest flaws with DLC for RPGs. They either can no longer create a complete story, forcing people to pay to get the entire game, or the DLC is so disconnected from the rest of the game to mostly be pointless. The Leviathan DLC was sort of the case of the former for ME3, while pretty much everything else has been the case of the latter.
That's silly, neither of those two outcomes have to be the answer. Bioware already did something better than both of those choices before with the Dragon Age Awakening expansion. DAO had a great epilogue and DAA was a good little expansion that was set post game that did a good job of incorporating a bunch of the choices you made into the beginning of it. Bioware's already proved that you don't have to bullshit your players like the two choices presented above. I think the key here is making good expansions rather than just throw away DLC chunks.
DA2's Legacy DLC was also a great mini-expansion that fit in nicely with the rest of the game, even if you completed it post game and it didn't feel disconnected or pointless. It also happened to be 100 times better (and that's understating it) than the rest of the game and fixed a ton of design mistakes, so I have some hope for DA3 based off it. I honestly wish Bioware hadn't cancelled the full DA2 expansion to devote more time to DA3, I think they could have bought back a lot of good will if it had been as good as DA2 Legacy was.
DA2's Legacy DLC was also a great mini-expansion that fit in nicely with the rest of the game, even if you completed it post game and it didn't feel disconnected or pointless. It also happened to be 100 times better (and that's understating it) than the rest of the game and fixed a ton of design mistakes, so I have some hope for DA3 based off it. I honestly wish Bioware hadn't cancelled the full DA2 expansion to devote more time to DA3, I think they could have bought back a lot of good will if it had been as good as DA2 Legacy was.
INDIFFERENCE IS AN EMOTION.
For the most part I agree with Sean, but I hated DA:O compared to Mass Effect. The one statement I'll make about the "superiority" of having a vocalized main character is those times when you make a decision and you expect it to be delivered one way and it's delivered completely differently is a huge immersion break.
Then again this happened in DA:O even with a mute character. Fucking friend zoned by Leliana and somehow on the verge of fucking some queer elf.
Tuco
I got Tuco'd!
- 45,505
- 73,597
Another big thing that ME did that other games should implement is the paragon/renegade interrupts. They really broke the dialog mould and they're the only time I liked QTE though I wish the delay was longer so I didn't have to drop my sandwich all over my desk just because Shep dropped a QTE on me when I thought I was safe.
Gavinmad
Mr. Poopybutthole
- 42,532
- 50,757
^^
Although I really wish they didn't have to be tied to paragon or renegade. Why the fuck does headbutting a Krogan to shut him up get me renegade points? It's part of their fucking culture.
Personal opinion on silent protagonists is that the way you create your character and view them is mostly illusion. Think of the games you've played with silent characters, where you are in their shoes. I could make choices after choices and my character so rarely reflected that. If someone sat over my shoulder and asked me about my moon elf assassin/shadow dancer/thief, the way I think of them would be utterly different from what they saw. Would they know that I killed a bunch of unarmed villagers, or fed them to some ogres? Would they know I was so chaotic evil characters in games instantly gave me the evil options?
No, they wouldn't. The "silent storytelling" works for people in the same way that others have better experiences reading books instead of watching the movie. Once you hear the characters you love, see them, and it doesn't match what you've made in your head, then for some people it loses something.
So what you have is a storytelling mode, wherein the developers, designers and writers have put just enough information in there to let you think of the rest of it yourself.
I like the protagonist with a voice, more than I care that I couldn't make Hawke an elf. (Fuck elves anyways.) Someone watching me play dragon age 2 could tell in probably 10 minutes that my character was romancing Isabela, that she was a smart ass, that she preferred to take the hard route if it meant saving lives, that she supported the templars, that she was a rogue, that she killed Fenris's sister etc. That same person watching my rogue in Baldur's Gate? "Uh her skin is purple?"
There is more of a storytelling aspect with a voiced protagonist, because more of the story unfolds in front of you, without you having to fill in the blanks. That's just fact.
Which is better? Who can say, people like both. I was not angry or annoyed I couldn't create another race with another background in DA2 really. My personal opinion is that DA:O made more sense with a noble human background, or a noble dwarf background because the other ways the backgrounds became grey wardens seem contrived and stretched, just to give you customization.
What I guess I'm saying is, I'd rather have a more fully fleshed out, intricate, personal story with a lot of details, than be given a silent hero, with virtually no way to tell (except for what I'd pictured in my head) who she was, who she loved, who she supported. I love Bethesda games, and there's a lot of choices you can make, but the only real way to figure out who your character is is when guards talk to you, picking things out about you. I followed every daedra prince and did all sorts of unspeakable things for artifact weapons, but i could waltz into a village and women would bring me their children to kiss.
Had it been written like DA2 and ME were written, the likely hood that I'd be chased out of the village or punched would have been higher, and would have really spoken to who my character was.
It's why SWTOR imo was so fantastic; they managed to merge a lot of customization with a very personal story, in which people reacted to choices I'd made. AND, you did stick to a morality system, but it was able to be picked apart; you didn't have to be evil, but taking money instead of doing stuff for free was viewed as dark side points. That was kind of cool - I'm not evil but I love me some cash.
However, if the price of a better storytelling experience is less customization, I'll take it, and gladly. When I want to think up my own story and my own hero, I have dnd pen and paper for that.
And I think you have to understand what Sean is saying; you think he's giving opinion, but I don't view it like that. The type of games with voices etc, do have a better storytelling aspect, becausethey wrote that part of the story in. There's nothing ambiguous about that. Is it a better overall experience foryou? That's the opinion part.
No, they wouldn't. The "silent storytelling" works for people in the same way that others have better experiences reading books instead of watching the movie. Once you hear the characters you love, see them, and it doesn't match what you've made in your head, then for some people it loses something.
So what you have is a storytelling mode, wherein the developers, designers and writers have put just enough information in there to let you think of the rest of it yourself.
I like the protagonist with a voice, more than I care that I couldn't make Hawke an elf. (Fuck elves anyways.) Someone watching me play dragon age 2 could tell in probably 10 minutes that my character was romancing Isabela, that she was a smart ass, that she preferred to take the hard route if it meant saving lives, that she supported the templars, that she was a rogue, that she killed Fenris's sister etc. That same person watching my rogue in Baldur's Gate? "Uh her skin is purple?"
There is more of a storytelling aspect with a voiced protagonist, because more of the story unfolds in front of you, without you having to fill in the blanks. That's just fact.
Which is better? Who can say, people like both. I was not angry or annoyed I couldn't create another race with another background in DA2 really. My personal opinion is that DA:O made more sense with a noble human background, or a noble dwarf background because the other ways the backgrounds became grey wardens seem contrived and stretched, just to give you customization.
What I guess I'm saying is, I'd rather have a more fully fleshed out, intricate, personal story with a lot of details, than be given a silent hero, with virtually no way to tell (except for what I'd pictured in my head) who she was, who she loved, who she supported. I love Bethesda games, and there's a lot of choices you can make, but the only real way to figure out who your character is is when guards talk to you, picking things out about you. I followed every daedra prince and did all sorts of unspeakable things for artifact weapons, but i could waltz into a village and women would bring me their children to kiss.
Had it been written like DA2 and ME were written, the likely hood that I'd be chased out of the village or punched would have been higher, and would have really spoken to who my character was.
It's why SWTOR imo was so fantastic; they managed to merge a lot of customization with a very personal story, in which people reacted to choices I'd made. AND, you did stick to a morality system, but it was able to be picked apart; you didn't have to be evil, but taking money instead of doing stuff for free was viewed as dark side points. That was kind of cool - I'm not evil but I love me some cash.
However, if the price of a better storytelling experience is less customization, I'll take it, and gladly. When I want to think up my own story and my own hero, I have dnd pen and paper for that.
And I think you have to understand what Sean is saying; you think he's giving opinion, but I don't view it like that. The type of games with voices etc, do have a better storytelling aspect, becausethey wrote that part of the story in. There's nothing ambiguous about that. Is it a better overall experience foryou? That's the opinion part.
Instead of writing my own long post, just read Vex's again.
I'll even embarass myself and say that SWTOR (and Saints Row 2/3) is what converted me from favoring "voiceless" to "voiced" main characters. So much so that I can't recognize SR2/3 without my guy & voice. Of course tgese games gave voice AND customization.
I'll even embarass myself and say that SWTOR (and Saints Row 2/3) is what converted me from favoring "voiceless" to "voiced" main characters. So much so that I can't recognize SR2/3 without my guy & voice. Of course tgese games gave voice AND customization.
Cantatus
Lord Nagafen Raider
- 1,437
- 79
Well, yes, and your last sentence is how I'd respond to the first. DLC is not an expansion, and I was discussing DLC. Personally, when it comes to RPGs, I wish developers would primarily focus on adding content through expansions.
To be honest, I think that's more a flaw with how Bethesda designs their games and little to do with a silent protagonist. It always bothered me in a game like Fallout 3 that there weren't many repercussions if I just went around killing everyone. Blow up a city with a nuke? Walk down the block and everyone is chummy with you. Hell, even EverQuest had a faction system where my actions in one area of the world could have an impact in another. Sure, it was really basic, but it did a decent job of making you consider your actions more.
There's really nothing that says Bethesda couldn't design a game where your actions had more of an impact on how people viewed you around the world, or even one that gives you more details about who your character is.
I think you could but it exponentially complicates the game due to you cutting yourself off from factions and therefore that faction's quests/story/rewards so you need to add in more quests on a different faction now or the game simply becomes shorter. Also the more of these factions and consequences you add the more things can fuck up and the game ships with a day-1 bug that makes it through QA that if you shoot the hooker outside the bar for no reason in the first 10min of the game it makes the game. unfinishable for faction end D, E and G withought a 6 gig two month of work patch
Well, I wasn't really trying to point out that they should give you hard consequences necessarily in things like skyrim. My main point was that with a silent protagonist, you have to live vicariously through the other characters reacting to you almost to figure out -anything- about you. And they were mostly canned expressions, such that your skill level in specific things, or your quest completion led to a new phrase near you. But, it doesn't quite go far enough. I knew what my character was, but outwardly, no one else could know that. Sit behind me long enough and you might come to understand specific things about my Nord, but in a game like DA/ME, your own character, in a way, narrated who they were whenever they accepted a quest, or talked to companions, etc. You weren't silent, there was no guessing, or assuming how your character, based on your choices, would react to given situations, and the type of person they were.
We say "storytelling" as an aspect of the game, whether it is voiced, or silent, or given to you piecemeal through quests. I think of storytelling as a verb, wherein the story is actuallytoldto you, based on your choices.
I prefer that method, just because it feels more complete. The story can't quite be told to you if it's notthere, and a good many games with silent heroes miss out on key chances to reinforce or even introduce elements because you walk around like you bit into a peanut butter sandwich -just- as someone asked you a really important question.
"And man, fuck those guys? Am I right? What say you, Dragonborn?"
"Mmfph mm mmfph pah!"
"Indeed."
As tempting as the DLC was, I had to vote with my money on that one. I think most people ignored the game altogether after the shitstorm that ensued, and the DLC (no matter how good) got lost in it's wake. Also, that Felicia Day DLC shit was ridiculous and clearly pandering.. that doesn't lend any credibility to them or DA2.
Yea, I was very much looking forward to the DLC, especially since I thought DA2 ended with things "up in the air". The reason for Varric describing the entire thing is because the divine march has happened and he's being interrogated etc.
Also, my main play through romanced Sebastian, and iirc part of the DLC was going to retake Starkhaven, so I was all set to become a Princess. Bastards took that away too.
On the site, when they said they were cancelling the DLC, they said they would wrap Hawke's story up for those following it, just not in game form. They havent done anything and I'm uncertain what that means. In DA3? With some crappy fanfiction? TELL ME WHAT HAPPENS.
Also, my main play through romanced Sebastian, and iirc part of the DLC was going to retake Starkhaven, so I was all set to become a Princess. Bastards took that away too.
On the site, when they said they were cancelling the DLC, they said they would wrap Hawke's story up for those following it, just not in game form. They havent done anything and I'm uncertain what that means. In DA3? With some crappy fanfiction? TELL ME WHAT HAPPENS.
Will you shut up! You're going to make me buy this stupid fucking thing you ass!