56 réponses à ce sujet

[daveliam]

I get where you're coming from sort of, but I find it easier to identify with a character (of any gender) with an actual semblance of being a human being than a blank slate "character" that just happens to share my genitalia and sexual orientation. Set characters have distinct personalities, hopes, motivations. All things I can identify with, and it's all already there, no headcanon needed. It's why I find it easier to identify with Lara Croft than with either of my Inquisitors.

 

I can understand why people wouldn't want to play a type of character that's been done to death (which Geralt hasn't I'll have you know, being a straight guy doesn't make him a cliche. He's rather unique as far as videogame protagonists go.) but I don't understand why people can't find some way to identify with them.   I've always found that attitude to be lacking in empathy.

 

I can understand this to a degree as well.  It's easier to identify with Lara Croft than the Courier (FO:NV) because she's got defined characteristics and the Courier is a total blank slate.

 

But customizable doesn't have to mean "blank slate", right?  I mean, Shepard's not a blank slate but s/he's customizable.  Hawke's not a blank slate, but s/he's customizable.  I don't think it has to be one extreme (no customization at all) or the other (total blank slate character).

 

I also genuinely think that it's easier to take an "it doesn't matter to me who I get to play as" when most of the characters do represent you in a way.  I think it's easy to overlook how important that is when it's taken for granted that it's that.  For example, personally it's not terribly important for me to play as a female character (I'd be happy with customizable male character), but I can understand why that's important for women. 

[In Exile]

Yes. People complaining about "cheating" disturbs me. Having a single long-term sexual partner is probably not natural and maybe not healthy for the vast majority of the population. Creating the *expectation* that it's an exclusive relationship and then *lying* about it is the bad part.

Also, I don't get this notion that I play (or should play) medieval-esque fantasy in the expectation that it should be "progressive".

Wait, hold-up. "Cheating" is wholly separate from monogamy. The issue with cheating is the breach of trust and blatant disregard for your partner inherent in breaching what is - by understanding - an essential part of your relationship. If you're in a poly relationship it's not "cheating" to have multiple partners ... provided you're respecting the rules you've set up for each other. If - for example - the rule in a poly relationship is "I want to be aware of your other partners, because they impact our relationship" and you keep someone hidden then that's still cheating.

[SnakeCode]

Yes.  People complaining about "cheating" disturbs me.  Having a single long-term sexual partner is probably not natural and maybe not healthy for the vast majority of the population.  Creating the *expectation* that it's an exclusive relationship and then *lying* about it is the bad part.

 

Also, I don't get this notion that I play (or should play) medieval-esque fantasy in the expectation that it should be "progressive".

 

I agree with the point about being progressive. I don't think it's just restricted to medieval rpgs though. I wouldn't expect or demand that any videogame be progressive. It's an entertainment medium. And whilst videogames can be used as an educational tool, I don't think a game's quality should be judged on how many minorities are represented or how a certain type of people are represented in game. That's why videogame journalism is going down the drain. 

[carlo angelo]

I get where you're coming from sort of, but I find it easier to identify with a character (of any gender) with an actual semblance of being a human being than a blank slate "character" that just happens to share my genitalia and sexual orientation. Set characters have distinct personalities, hopes, motivations. All things I can identify with, and it's all already there, no headcanon needed. It's why I find it easier to identify with Lara Croft than with either of my Inquisitors.

I can understand why people wouldn't want to play a type of character that's been done to death (which Geralt hasn't I'll have you know, being a straight guy doesn't make him a cliche. He's rather unique as far as videogame protagonists go.) but I don't understand why people can't find some way to identify with them. I've always found that attitude to be lacking in empathy.

The thing is, as much as I wish I could appreciate the Witcher series as much as many people do, and as much I understand being able to identify with a set protagonist more readily than a blank slate for a PC, there are people who've already done that all the time, more often than not, with protagonists they can't relate to, to the point that blank slate PC have become a sort of respite. That isn't to say it's the Witcher's failing. Barring that I haven't played the first two games, maybe once I'm ready to play as that particular protagonist again and enjoy it as I would seeing movie rather than fully immersing myself as Geralt, perhaps, then.

But like I said, if there were protagonists- set protagonists with personality traits and identities I could more easily empathise with, with back stories and histories I find intriguing, then I'd be more up for it. A lot of players say they RPGs for escapism and the story- I'd pretty much want the same things.

I don't know what else to say, other than that I'm sorry I probably cannot enjoy Witcher with you and that we can't fully have a chat over it as a fan. I promise that's not sarcasm.

[PsychoBlonde]

 

I can understand why people wouldn't want to play a type of character that's been done to death (which Geralt hasn't I'll have you know, being a straight guy doesn't make him a cliche. He's rather unique as far as videogame protagonists go.) but I don't understand why people can't find some way to identify with them.   I've always found that attitude to be lacking in empathy.

 

I can't identify with Geralt because I find his personality and style enormously off-putting.  I quite enjoy numerous games with a set male protagonist--Planescape: Torment, Prince of Persia: The Sands of Time, Gothic, Gothic 2, Risen . . . but given the option, I want to play as a female with a personality I enjoy, and generally the only games that allow me that option are the ones with blank-slate protagonists that you build yourself.

Well, that and I like complex leveling systems.  It takes something truly special in a weirdly unique way to get me to play an action game.  It's not lack of empathy, it's just that if a game doesn't appeal to me super-strongly, I'll play DDO.

[SnakeCode]

I can understand this to a degree as well.  It's easier to identify with Lara Croft than the Courier (FO:NV) because she's got defined characteristics and the Courier is a total blank slate.

 

But customizable doesn't have to mean "blank slate", right?  I mean, Shepard's not a blank slate but s/he's customizable.  Hawke's not a blank slate, but s/he's customizable.  I don't think it has to be one extreme (no customization at all) or the other (total blank slate character).

 

I also genuinely think that it's easier to take an "it doesn't matter to me who I get to play as" when most of the characters do represent you in a way.  I think it's easy to overlook how important that is when it's taken for granted that it's that.  For example, personally it's not terribly important for me to play as a female character (I'd be happy with customizable male character), but I can understand why that's important for women. 

 

Oh absolutely. I didn't mean to imply it's an all or nothing scenario. You can certainly have fleshed out characters that you can still partially create. I stil think the characterization suffers a little bit when compared to a fully defined character, but that's a topic for another time. I also completely understand people wanting to play as people like themselves, or see people like themselves represented in a hobby thy love.

 

I just don't like the "I don't identify with..." arguments. It feels like a cop out answer. At first glance it seems like a more palatable answer than "I just want to play characters who are like me." I think it's the start of the path that leads to intolerance and bigotry though.

[Conal Pierse]

There is an existing thread on this topic in general, so we don't need a troll-bait thread that is rather off topic. You are free to discuss this further in the original thread, or take it to off-topic.

Also, as a general note, if everyone could chill out a little bit on both sides of this coin I would appreciate it. Liking the Witcher or Liking DA aren't mutually exclusive, and enjoying one game over the other does not make anyone a bad person or in any way mean they are wrong. Please try to keep your discussions civil and respectful.