Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Your analogy is wrong, it would be more accurate to write “It's like you complaint about every paintings having the same boring frames”. Or something. Because he never said he refused to look at the rest of the game and enjoy it (or not) for its other traits.

I think both custom and and pre-built characters are equally valid game elements, no matter if what you are/aren't getting customization with is appearance or something else.

However, I can certainly appreciate a frustration with the large stable of games using rather "Stock" characters. Particularly when so many of those games are trying to make "You" the player character in question, with the stock option being so unlike you only for the sake of safe marketability.

That said I'm not sure those are valid criticisms of set characters or even the stock characters like Grizzled McWhiteDude in and of themselves. Rather the problem is with how just how prolific and flimsily justified the uses of these elements are.

 Chongara wrote:
I think both custom and and pre-built characters are equally valid game elements, no matter if what you are/aren't getting customization with is appearance or something else.

However, I can certainly appreciate a frustration with the large stable of games using rather "Stock" characters. Particularly when so many of those games are trying to make "You" the player character in question, with the stock option being so unlike you only for the sake of safe marketability.

That said I'm not sure those are valid criticisms of set characters or even the stock characters like Grizzled McWhiteDude in and of themselves. Rather the problem is with how just how prolific and flimsily justified the uses of these elements are.

A great example is look at the bioshock series.

It has a lot of defined characters Andrew Ryan, Jack is a defined character, Booker is a defined character, and also a father.

Elizabeth is a defined character and had her own DLC which is as long as the original game. etc. etc.


I personally love those games because they make the women in their games definable and human like. (Except maybe Elizabeth, who felt like a god damn human being.)

 illuknisaa wrote:

Melissia wrote:I was responding to Bishop.

So?

If you want to know the context of my post, you would read his post. The context is quite clear.

Melissia wrote:

 illuknisaa wrote:

Melissia wrote:I was responding to Bishop.

So?

If you want to know the context of my post, you would read his post. The context is quite clear.

Been there, done that.

Bishop F Gantry wrote:

 Chongara wrote:

 illuknisaa wrote:


Why should devs waste any effort on features that are as shallow as possbile and add nothing of value to their game? Wanting games to have options for the sake of options is a bad idea. Imagine if the time spent on character creator of skyrim were spent spent melee combat or quest design instead the game would be much better.

I know this may come as a shock to anyone who hasn't like, looked at the credits in them but these games are made by a ton of people and those two things were probably done by entirely different teams on the project.

If you cut one thing you can focus money on the other thing and devs are already cutting corners so bad nowadays it looks like a circle instead of a square.

You can't lose talent if there is none. Adding extra hairstyles to a character = zero talent.

Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:Your analogy is wrong, it would be more accurate to write “It's like you complaint about every paintings having the same boring frames”. Or something. Because he never said he refused to look at the rest of the game and enjoy it (or not) for its other traits.

Oh? I guess I got it wrong then.

 Lynata wrote:
I don't think I would have purchased Skyrim if it had forced me into playing this dude and him alone.

 illuknisaa wrote:
You can't lose talent if there is none. Adding extra hairstyles to a character = zero talent.

Damn man, just because you don't like a feature or the thought of its inclusion doesn't mean there's no talent behind it. I'm trying to pick up 3D modeling skills and when you say something like that it is really dismissive.

Also, what's with the painting metaphor? Just take the words for exactly what they are, Lynata is tired of the same character archetype being used over and over again. Why would you even try to represent it as anything else? Doesn't that statement stand on its own and make complete sense as it is? Don't try to complicate and compare it when you already know what is being said. Just argue against what was said, don't set up a phony argument.

I think that the popularity of customizable characters has proven there is a market. Heck, it's standard even in fps multi-player games.

Like it has been mentioned in this thread, being able to change the PCs appearance would not effect the game play.

If you like the status quo, that's fine. But you don't have to be so dismissive of other people's issues with the media.

 AdeptSister wrote:
I think that the popularity of customizable characters has proven there is a market. Heck, it's standard even in fps multi-player games.

Problem there is that Multi-player parts of FPS games have no bearing on story, so really having customizing options for your character has nothing to do with the game itself. In the case of FPS games, it's generally a means to differentiate yourself from others' or, sometimes to gain a terrain advantage over other players.

 AdeptSister wrote:
I think that the popularity of customizable characters has proven there is a market. Heck, it's standard even in fps multi-player games.

Like it has been mentioned in this thread, being able to change the PCs appearance would not effect the game play.

If you like the status quo, that's fine. But you don't have to be so dismissive of other people's issues with the media.

Customised characters can cause clipping and wire-frame issues, though, as seen in almost every wrestling game. I'm not saying it's a bad feature, I think it should be pretty much mandatory for RPGs, but it does require more coding and testing than a set character.

Not to mention gender select means changes to the script if "he/she" is used anywhere, even if they're mainly called by their surname or a title. "That Shepard, he sure get's things done," would be jarring if you were playing a FemShep, for example. I still can't forget that happening in Jedi Academy with my female character

 VorpalBunny74 wrote:

 AdeptSister wrote:
I think that the popularity of customizable characters has proven there is a market. Heck, it's standard even in fps multi-player games.

Like it has been mentioned in this thread, being able to change the PCs appearance would not effect the game play.

If you like the status quo, that's fine. But you don't have to be so dismissive of other people's issues with the media.

Customised characters can cause clipping and wire-frame issues, though, as seen in almost every wrestling game. I'm not saying it's a bad feature, I think it should be pretty much mandatory for RPGs, but it does require more coding and testing than a set character.

Not to mention gender select means changes to the script if "he/she" is used anywhere, even if they're mainly called by their surname or a title. "That Shepard, he sure get's things done," would be jarring if you were playing a FemShep, for example. I still can't forget that happening in Jedi Academy with my female character

Yeah, that happens in Saints Row 4 as well. I remember NPCs referring to my lady-boss as a guy sometimes.
Though it is funny hearing Laura Bailey saying she wants more stripper poles

Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:Because he never said he refused to look at the rest of the game and enjoy it (or not) for its other traits.

Pretty much.

From earlier post in other threads:
"This is not to say that predefined character appearances automatically make a game or a movie gak, but in my opinion it certainly is something which plays a role in my overall assessment of the game, added to by how much I like said game's other aspects, and how much I like/dislike whatever the developers have chosen to "force" on me in terms of the character I am supposed to play."
- http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/60/539180.page#5835495

"For example, I disliked the inability to "adjust" Adam Jensen in Deus Ex - something which was still possible in the preceding game - but at least the character looked somewhat unique, and the brilliant story allowed me to overcome what I still see as a flaw."
- http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/60/539180.page#5837723

In other words, for me character customisation is an important feature, but not the only thing I'm looking for in a game. You know how various games magazines give different ratings for stuff like graphics, gameplay, story etc? Well, I have a similar system, just that "customisation" is part of it, too.

illuknisaa wrote:Oh? I guess I got it wrong then.

You did, but it's pretty common on the internet to assume the worst just because someone has a different opinion.

VorpalBunny74 wrote:Not to mention gender select means changes to the script if "he/she" is used anywhere, even if they're mainly called by their surname or a title. "That Shepard, he sure get's things done," would be jarring if you were playing a FemShep, for example.

You can minimise this impact with just a little foresight when writing the dialogue, though. There's no reason why that line couldn't be "That Shepard sure gets things done", for example. And Mass Effect in particular had a noticeable trend of using "Shepard" in place of he/she - this has also allowed the character to give their Shep a different first name without it affecting the dialogue.

Not saying that this sort of customisation doesn't up the budget still. It certainly does. But generally, I find such claims to often be exaggerated, as if the cost of making a game would suddenly jump up 100% as if the dev was forced to make everything twice.

As for the clipping and wireframe issues - I think Mass Effect also only used 1-2 bodies per race for all the NPCs, and just switched heads? Though technologies such as the one developed by the indie team of The Mandate clearly shows what you can do to support a great variety of body shapes.
If you really want to make good customisation, there's a large number of games that can show you how it's done, from Star Trek Online to APB. It all depends on how important a feature you consider it, and what amount of customisation you believe should be minimum, which obviously depends on personal preferences. Hell, even just having half a dozen premade characters to choose from would already help a lot - remember KotOR or Deus Ex Invisible War? Two body types (male, female) with three heads (caucasian, african-american, asian) each.

 Lynata wrote:
You can minimise this impact with just a little foresight when writing the dialogue, though. There's no reason why that line couldn't be "That Shepard sure gets things done", for example. And Mass Effect in particular had a noticeable trend of using "Shepard" in place of he/she - this has also allowed the character to give their Shep a different first name without it affecting the dialogue.

Not saying that this sort of customisation doesn't up the budget still. It certainly does. But generally, I find such claims to often be exaggerated, as if the cost of making a game would suddenly jump up 100% as if the dev was forced to make everything twice.

As for the clipping and wireframe issues - I think Mass Effect also only used 1-2 bodies per race for all the NPCs, and just switched heads? Though technologies such as the one developed by the indie team of The Mandate clearly shows what you can do to support a great variety of body shapes.
If you really want to make good customisation, there's a large number of games that can show you how it's done, from Star Trek Online to APB. It all depends on how important a feature you consider it, and what amount of customisation you believe should be minimum, which obviously depends on personal preferences. Hell, even just having half a dozen premade characters to choose from would already help a lot - remember KotOR or Deus Ex Invisible War? Two body types (male, female) with three heads (caucasian, african-american, asian) each.

I agree, a gender select option can be minimized, but as you said only if it's included from the planning stage. In which case I'm not even sure it would affect some budgets. If video game development is like general software development then most budget blowouts happen because some bright spark wants a new feature halfway through development or testing.

I'm not saying customisation or gender select shouldn't be in more games (I WANT them to be in more games) but they need to be included from the start, no free lunch and all that.

Lotet wrote:

 illuknisaa wrote:
You can't lose talent if there is none. Adding extra hairstyles to a character = zero talent.

Damn man, just because you don't like a feature or the thought of its inclusion doesn't mean there's no talent behind it. I'm trying to pick up 3D modeling skills and when you say something like that it is really dismissive.

Are you going to make a game with just 3d modelling skills? If you are then I'm sorry to tell you that the game is going to suck.

AdeptSister wrote:I think that the popularity of customizable characters has proven there is a market. Heck, it's standard even in fps multi-player games.

Like it has been mentioned in this thread, being able to change the PCs appearance would not effect the game play.

If you like the status quo, that's fine. But you don't have to be so dismissive of other people's issues with the media.

Popular ideas are smart ideas? I like the way you think.

Lynata wrote:

Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:Because he never said he refused to look at the rest of the game and enjoy it (or not) for its other traits.

Pretty much.

illuknisaa wrote:Oh? I guess I got it wrong then.

You did, but it's pretty common on the internet to assume the worst just because someone has a different opinion.

Lynata this is your post correct?:

 Lynata wrote:
I don't think I would have purchased Skyrim if it had forced me into playing this dude and him alone.

VorpalBunny74 wrote:I'm not saying customisation or gender select shouldn't be in more games (I WANT them to be in more games) but they need to be included from the start, no free lunch and all that.

Oh yeah, absolutely.

I guess I'm just a bit angry that it's not included from the start as I feel it should be an industry standard by now, just like almost everyone and their mum is doing things in 3D nowadays.

illuknisaa wrote:Lynata this is your post correct?:

Of course. You can see it on the name that precedes the "wrote" part at the top.

Thing is that you immediately jumped to conclusions as if I had posted a much broader statement such as "I'd never purchase any game if it forced me to play some premade character". It certainly is a valid interpretation, but only the worst out of several options. Several other posters have correctly guessed my intent - though that may just be because they're more accustomed to me posting on these subjects than you are (or who may have read the earlier statements I linked to).
My mistake may have been not to word it less ambiguous, but at the same time you kept insisting on that "evil image" of mine you concocted in your head, even where other posters pointed out several alternate possibilities that would paint me in a better image. Why did not give me the benefit of the doubt, like I did with Asherian Command here?

In general, I feel there's several posters from both sides of the debate(s) in this thread who might benefit from not automatically assuming the worst of the other side even if it sounds like arguments against something they consider important. If something is not perfectly clear, just phrase a post in a way that the other side has to clarify their position instead of painting them like arrogant dicks. Maybe they really are arrogant dicks, but don't assume so just because they take a position you don't like.

 VorpalBunny74 wrote:
I'm not saying customisation or gender select shouldn't be in more games (I WANT them to be in more games) but they need to be included from the start, no free lunch and all that.

I agree entirely. Devs need to think about inclusion from the very start of their game concept.

 illuknisaa wrote:

Lotet wrote:

 illuknisaa wrote:
You can't lose talent if there is none. Adding extra hairstyles to a character = zero talent.

Damn man, just because you don't like a feature or the thought of its inclusion doesn't mean there's no talent behind it. I'm trying to pick up 3D modeling skills and when you say something like that it is really dismissive.

Also, what's with the painting metaphor? Just take the words for exactly what they are, Lynata is tired of the same character archetype being used over and over again. Why would you even try to represent it as anything else? Doesn't that statement stand on its own and make complete sense as it is? Don't try to complicate and compare it when you already know what is being said. Just argue against what was said, don't set up a phony argument.

Are you going to make a game with just 3d modelling skills? If you are then I'm sorry to tell you that the game is going to suck.

Really dude? What's your deal? I'm telling you now I've already learnt how to use Unity3D and GameMaker:Studio before that. Animation and Modelling are the only parts I'm having trouble with, every gap of knowledge for programming is easy for me to fill, so I've decided to learn how to make basic models and get them to work in a game, instead of using pre-built models that Unity can provide because I want to expand my knowledge and not have it be a problem in the future and because you can't make a game without those assets, despite how good my brother may be at 2D and 3D art he's too lazy to help long term. Hopefully I can get him to texture the models at least since he's a 2D artist primarily and a 2D artist can make low poly models look good.

I don't even understand why you would say something like that. Oh, wait, it's what Lynata said. You assumed the worst.

 Lotet wrote:

 illuknisaa wrote:
Are you going to make a game with just 3d modelling skills? If you are then I'm sorry to tell you that the game is going to suck.

Really dude? What's your deal? I'm telling you now I've already learnt how to use Unity3D and GameMaker:Studio before that. Animation and Modelling are the only parts I'm having trouble with, every gap of knowledge for programming is easy for me to fill, so I've decided to learn how to make basic models and get them to work in a game, instead of using pre-built models that Unity can provide because I want to expand my knowledge and not have it be a problem in the future and because you can't make a game without those assets, despite how good my brother may be at 2D and 3D art he's too lazy to help long term. Hopefully I can get him to texture the models at least since he's a 2D artist primarily and a 2D artist can make low poly models look good.

I don't even understand why you would say something like that. Oh, wait, it's what Lynata said. You assumed the worst.

There's no point trying to have a reasoned discussion with him. This is the guy that was overjoyed at the fact that PSN got hacked a couple of years ago, because it only hurt console gamers, not real gamers, and they deserved it because he had to put up with shoddy ports. You're not going to convince him of anything, and I wouldn't recommend trying; it's like slamming your head into a brick wall with a superiority complex.

 illuknisaa wrote:
It will only hurt console owners (those who deserve it and more) not gamers.

Well hey, you're right, he said it in no uncertain terms.

Still, I've known an idiot who thought humans could blow up the sun with nukes and that console gamers aren't real gamers, both when he was 17, but now he's a relatively normal guy. The above quoted post was form 3 and a half years ago, after all. If illuknisaa just stop trying to insult people who disagree with him or try to ask him questions, he might also turn out to be pretty normal nowadays.

 Lotet wrote:

Really dude? What's your deal? I'm telling you now I've already learnt how to use Unity3D and GameMaker:Studio before that. Animation and Modelling are the only parts I'm having trouble with, every gap of knowledge for programming is easy for me to fill, so I've decided to learn how to make basic models and get them to work in a game, instead of using pre-built models that Unity can provide because I want to expand my knowledge and not have it be a problem in the future and because you can't make a game without those assets, despite how good my brother may be at 2D and 3D art he's too lazy to help long term. Hopefully I can get him to texture the models at least since he's a 2D artist primarily and a 2D artist can make low poly models look good.

I don't even understand why you would say something like that. Oh, wait, it's what Lynata said. You assumed the worst.

I think my deal is pretty obvious. You* can't make a game with just 3d modelling skills. In fact you* could drop the entire graphics modelling department from a studio and the game would still be playable.

What I don't get is how people have problems with character customization which has the least amount impact on the actual game. There is nothing wrong having a deep character customization but only if all the other parts of the game work. Things like explosion visuals are far more important to a action game than any hairstyle option could ever be.

Lynata's post here are just hilarious. He cares more about can he change the size of his nose than the gakky melee mechanics, shallow map design or retardo story. The fact that skyrim is a first person game is just icing on the cake.

*I don't mean just you, lotet.

That is a stupendous example of a strawman argument.

In a thread about video games on a site primarily devoted to miniature wargaming, people REALLY need to remember the rules that govern posting here - ESPECIALLY Rule #1.

 illuknisaa wrote:

 Lotet wrote:

Really dude? What's your deal? I'm telling you now I've already learnt how to use Unity3D and GameMaker:Studio before that. Animation and Modelling are the only parts I'm having trouble with, every gap of knowledge for programming is easy for me to fill, so I've decided to learn how to make basic models and get them to work in a game, instead of using pre-built models that Unity can provide because I want to expand my knowledge and not have it be a problem in the future and because you can't make a game without those assets, despite how good my brother may be at 2D and 3D art he's too lazy to help long term. Hopefully I can get him to texture the models at least since he's a 2D artist primarily and a 2D artist can make low poly models look good.

I don't even understand why you would say something like that. Oh, wait, it's what Lynata said. You assumed the worst.

I think my deal is pretty obvious. You* can't make a game with just 3d modelling skills. In fact you* could drop the entire graphics modelling department from a studio and the game would still be playable.

No one said one only needs 3d modelling skills to create a game.
It is a useful thing to have though.

I do agree that Skyrim is overrated. It is a decent game, but it is not the second coming of game design.
FNV is more deserving of that title

No one said one only needs 3d modelling skills to create a game.
It is a useful thing to have though.

I do agree that Skyrim is overrated. It is a decent game, but it is not the second coming of game design.
FNV is more deserving of that title

Correct. 3d modelling is optional, and is usually the most expensive part of any game company is usually the 3d modelling and rendering.

Usually a programmer is also trained in 3d modelling.

 illuknisaa wrote:
I think my deal is pretty obvious. You* can't make a game with just 3d modelling skills. In fact you* could drop the entire graphics modelling department from a studio and the game would still be playable.

*I don't mean just you, lotet.

Sure you could drop the graphics department. Though I don't know why you mention that, considering no one said it. But I'm sitting here with an unwrapped model wondering what the hell has gone wrong with it. So a graphics department would be nice and can literally flesh out a world.

 illuknisaa wrote:
What I don't get is how people have problems with character customization which has the least amount impact on the actual game. There is nothing wrong having a deep character customization but only if all the other parts of the game work. Things like explosion visuals are far more important to a action game than any hairstyle option could ever be.

That may be true, but Skyrim is an RPG primarily, not an action game. So to me, that customization is very important to how much I enjoy the game. Heck, it really is one of the reasons that I make new characters and replay the game over and over, along with other Elder Scrolls and Fallout games.

 illuknisaa wrote:
Lynata's post here are just hilarious. He cares more about can he change the size of his nose than the gakky melee mechanics, shallow map design or retardo story. The fact that skyrim is a first person game is just icing on the cake.

Oh? I think in Bethesda games it's already important. The game hundreds of NPCs and each one has a unique face. So they already have the technology for full character customization anyway. I get much more attached to the NPCs when they don't all look identical. Take Morowind for example, they had pre-made faces so the NPCs had to be very special in personality to stand out, such as Divayth Fyr or Crassius. In Skyrim I can remember most NPCs, even if I forget their name.

Plus hey, you get all those other games that concentrate more on explosions than character faces. I'm very glad that the variety provided by Skyrim exists to do what other games don't. How can a game so un-amazing in so many ways attract so many people? I assume for the same reasons some people hate it before finishing an hour of gameplay... you're not one of those people who abandoned Skyrim quickly are you? That might explain quite a bit about you.

If you're gonna keep arguing about this you should choose a different game. Since I find it very important to my overall enjoyment. If there were only 10 different faces, it would really affect me. I'd certainly take improved hairstyle option over explosion visuals.

 Alpharius wrote:
Rule #1

illuknisaa, could you please PLEASE read Rule #1. I really want you to read it. It's only a few paragraphs. Could you read it please?

 Alpharius wrote:
In a thread about video games on a site primarily devoted to miniature wargaming, people REALLY need to remember the rules that govern posting here - ESPECIALLY Rule #1.

I tried that last time, then I got told I was using the Authority Fallacy and was chased out by an angry mob!


Though it really tells you how passionate 'gamers' here get when they talk about games.

Even though sometimes they say they know but they don't really know all the business behind the computer.

Or the techniques Designers use to grab your attention. There are extremely subtle and you can never really tell unless you have been trained to do so.

Ever since learning about animation basically most games are ruined to me when I noticed problems in movement.

Now back on topic.

Men are not under represented, though we have a large category of them. Most times falling in the gruff and gun wielding silent protagonist category.

Very few times do we get a character that is well defined and follows a character arc. You know character 101. Where the character matures or changes.

For example: Booker DeWitt, becomes more protective of Elizabeth and grows up a bit. He changes from a sarcastic jerk to a very caring man of Elizabeth.

Another Example: Jason Brody, starts out as a college student on vacation.

There are a few examples throughout gaming, mostly done by very good producers and game directors. 2k Usually releases some of the best games that center around story.

Spec Ops: The Line and Bioshock Infinite having some of the best characters in gaming. Period.

(Though that is an opinion not an insertion in this debate.)

There a few games that use the silent protagonist in ingenius ways. In the mark of the ninja for example you are an outcast of the clan you bare the mark. A curse upon you for crimes you have done to your clan.


Male characters should have more memorable qualities. But most fall into a blur.

illuknisaa wrote:Lynata's post here are just hilarious. He cares more about can he change the size of his nose than the gakky melee mechanics, shallow map design or retardo story.

Lynata wrote:This is not to say that predefined character appearances automatically make a game or a movie gak, but in my opinion it certainly is something which plays a role in my overall assessment of the game, added to by how much I like said game's other aspects, and how much I like/dislike whatever the developers have chosen to "force" on me in terms of the character I am supposed to play.

Lynata wrote:In other words, for me character customisation is an important feature, but not the only thing I'm looking for in a game. You know how various games magazines give different ratings for stuff like graphics, gameplay, story etc? Well, I have a similar system, just that "customisation" is part of it, too.

Now you're not even jumping to conclusions anymore, you're just ignoring what I said.

Well, it's your choice.

Asherian Command wrote:Male characters should have more memorable qualities. But most fall into a blur.

Yeah, the visual design doesn't help either. In fact, it might even affect perception more than a character's actual personality, unless you've got a very exceptional game. Most of the time there's just a huge risk of immediately falling into a bias because you see a character's design and immediately think "oh, it's one of those again", even if it turns out to be unjustified. Some designers need to learn that mainstream =/= memorable. Most of the time, you just can't have both.

Well, when you've seen a thousand scruffy white boy action heroes already, it does feel like any future one won't be any different.

Yeah, the visual design doesn't help either. In fact, it might even affect perception more than a character's actual personality, unless you've got a very exceptional game. Most of the time there's just a huge risk of immediately falling into a bias because you see a character's design and immediately think "oh, it's one of those again", even if it turns out to be unjustified. Some designers need to learn that mainstream =/= memorable. Most of the time, you just can't have both.

You can have some really memorable characters. As long as you have a good character I am fine with it.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Melissia wrote:
Well, when you've seen a thousand scruffy white boy action heroes already, it does feel like any future one won't be any different.

I disagree. You can always have a good character regardless of race or gender.

We have yet to see a gunslinger that is charitable, but wrathful. Easily angered but is doing the right thing. Basically a robin hood character. So far we have only had 1 character fit under this category. And that's Garret from the ORIGINAL Thief Games.

I think we need better characters overall and more diversity.

Personally as a writer I think its easy. But a developer would tell me otherwise.

A bunch of copy pasted stock characters aren't memorable by definition. Maybe memorable stories, or games, but the character themselves is forgettable.

Think of Scruffy McWhiteDude as Keanu Reeves. Yeah, sometimes he's in a decent movie. But really, was the Matrix good because Keanu Reeves was in it? No. Keanu Reeves was pretty bland in the Matrix and we only remember that movie because most of the rest of it was pretty good. Even portraying the awesome John Constantine, Keanu Reeves managed to be unbelievably bland (and that movie really need a good actor in the lead role to save it too ).

Scruffy McWhiteDude is Keanu Reeves. Forgettable, uninspiring, and generally the person you hire for the job when you got no one else.

 LordofHats wrote:
A bunch of copy pasted stock characters aren't memorable by definition. Maybe memorable stories, or games, but the character themselves is forgettable.

Think of Scruffy McWhiteDude as Keanu Reeves. Yeah, sometimes he's in a decent movie. But really, was the Matrix good because Keanu Reeves was in it? No. Keanu Reeves was pretty bland in the Matrix and we only remember that movie because most of the rest of it was pretty good. Even portraying the awesome John Constantine, Keanu Reeves managed to be unbelievably bland (and that movie really need a good actor in the lead role to save it too ).

Scruffy McWhiteDude is Keanu Reeves. Forgettable, uninspiring, and generally the person you hire for the job when you got no one else.

What if Scruffy McWhiteDude is played by John Wayne?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Asherian Command wrote:

 Melissia wrote:
Well, when you've seen a thousand scruffy white boy action heroes already, it does feel like any future one won't be any different.

I disagree. You can always have a good character regardless of race or gender.

We have yet to see a gunslinger that is charitable, but wrathful. Easily angered but is doing the right thing. Basically a robin hood character. So far we have only had 1 character fit under this category. And that's Garret from the ORIGINAL Thief Games.

I think we need better characters overall and more diversity.

Personally as a writer I think its easy. But a developer would tell me otherwise.

Like Rooster Cogburn? I wouldn't mind a game with a Rooster Cogburn sort of character.