The Protagonist Problem

[Raype]

So rather than simply make jokes about GG's situation without doing anything to remedy matters (aside from posting), I'm going to attempt a half assed effort to do something.

So here's an idea: How does one handle the main character in the game?

Seems like a simple enough topic, right? But here's the deal, people all seem to have their own preference on which they prefer. Some like the blank slate character that lacks any personality. A silent protagonist type character. Others prefer a character that has an established backstory/personality/whatever. The characterized protagonist.

While both have their places (IE: it's easy to say "Make the RPG protagonist silent, make the others talk"), there's plenty of gray areas and difficult realms to enter. I'm sure we can each think of certain arguments for and against both types, and we each have a certain game that featured one, the other, or both and we'd feel rather differently about it if one or more characters was either infused with his/her own personality as dictated by the writer or had a rather endearing personality stripped from them.

And then we get into complications where a previously silent protagonist begins to speak up. As far as I've been able to see, this ALWAYS divides the fanbase. Some welcome the change since having a character that can't say a single word makes them feel awkard and a bit unnatural in the game world. While others cry sacrilege at this "new character" not stacking up to their own personal interpretation of the character. If the series in question changed hands somewhere along the line, expect a torch bearing mob.

Building on this further, we've experienced hybrids of both types. The RPG genre has taken a bit of a liking to trying to combine the two types, creating a character that has some form of backstory, personality, and possibly even a voice, but otherwise left open to whatever the player decides the character should be, often this is executed by allowing the player to make choices using this character that can shape them to an extent. While this can work pretty well in concept, it can lead to unusual circumstances such as the big gruff warrior who has been through hell somehow winding up being an exceptionally nice guy. Or, alternatively, a seemingly pleasant character who turns into a raging psychopath once player control comes into the equation. However, it seems to fit a bit better since this way a character doesn't spontaneously congeal out of the mysts and it makes character interaction better "in theory".

Furthermore, there's plenty of annoyances involved with this whole ordeal. Videogames these days tend to have a strong emphasis on a storyline. Through that, they often feel the need to have the main character carry out certain actions. Unfortunately, this can cause them to put words into our supposed silent avatar's mouth. Or, perhaps more accurately, actions in our body. How many games have we completed only to have control wrestled from us at one point or another because the developers felt the need to tell more story? Or how about the black and white morality that plagues a lot of games? Maybe I was being evil because, hey, it gets stuff accomplished and I'm trying to save the fucking world over here. But once the ending rolls around, somehow my "extreme with a reason" character has turned into an evil humanity dooming asshole. On the flip side, maybe I go good because it's just a good idea to stay on people's good sides. Somehow that turns me into a saint? The hell?

Of course, protagonists with a personality don't exactly get off either. While it's a lot more natural for them to act/talk/whatever a certain way and carry out certain actions, there's plenty of opportunities to behave in ways that seem very unlike the character we see in the cutscenes. I can't be the only one who played through a sandbox vehicle stealing game where the main character is generally opposed to killing in cutscene, only to have him gleefully mow down entire families once control is returned to the player. And thanks to the way videogames work, this is never brought up by anybody. Even if you happened to be bringing a story related NPC along for several rounds of punt the pedestrian.

So before I ramble on any more than I already have (I'll try not to do it too much), what are your thoughts on this? Should the whole Silent Protagonist be viewed as a pointless relic of a simpler time and go the way of 2d gaming? Should we leave more things open to player interpretation at the possible detriment of the story? Should games move more towards trying to find a middle ground between the two extremes? Is there any game that you can think of that did one thing or the other "right", or perhaps holds up to a standard that more games should follow? Or is there a certain game/scene/whatever that strikes you as an outright betrayal to the concept of the main character?

[JKDarkside]

The Silent hero has a place, and that place is to act as your avatar and let you insert yourself in a story.

This is why I have issues with guys like Link. They actually have been trying to flesh him out for many games now, yet he never speaks. There is no reason for him not to speak either. At least with Ammy in Okami she was a wolf and therefore couldn't talk, that made sense. Link has no excuse other than a bunch of fans stuck on nostalgia. I don't mind much with characters like Mario since most their games have little story, but the LoZ series always has some sort of grand tale. It's hard to really get into it when you control this character you know absolutely nothing about beyond basic observations who has his own life.

On the other hand, you have to actually get someone who can write. I like how Other M tried fleshing out Samus, the issue was the awful script and the fact nearly all of it was handled with narration instead of letting us watch how Samus interacts with her allies and enemies. That gets annoying, which goes double if it's all done mainly in cutscenes.

[Solbadude]

Always been a fan of the Silent Protagonist. From BoF to Ys, to even say.... Wander from Shadow of the Colossus(yelling Argo does not count. It is more of a grunt like when Ryu scores a critical) something about the hero facing overwhelming odds without ever uttering a word of discouragement is very empowering. To me at least. Plus I think It adds a sense of immersion. I feel more like I am playing a role of someone, while if the protagonist talks, it is more like I am just observing the story.

[Nemkoon]

I believe that Silent protaganist is cool in some games (SMT)
and just play EMO in others (Final Fantasy 7 up)
And they're arent even silent, i just want them to shut up more than half the time for the emo ones

[Solbadude]

FF7 and up had no silent protagonist, unless you count no voice acting. One that could have needed it is FFX. If Tidus never opened his mouth the game would be digestible.

[Nemkoon]

FF7 and up had no silent protagonist, unless you count no voice acting. One that could have needed it is FFX. If Tidus never opened his mouth the game would be digestible.

I did mean no vioice acting.
Shin Megami Tensei is the only RPG series that can do good VAs
Final Fantasy's is horrible, and Dragon Quest stays silent for its own good

[JKDarkside]

Dragon Quest stays silent for its own good

VIII.

Fantastic cast.

[Gypsy]

VIII.

Fantastic cast.

Fantastic game. For real.

I really don't mind either way, it's not something that's going to impact me playing a game or not.

Should we leave more things open to player interpretation at the possible detriment of the story?

No. The story is the most important aspect of a game to me. Choices in a game are fine as long as the developers want to flesh out the plot regarding all decisions.

Oh and your post is really tl;dr but yet...I did read it...<3

[Colamisu]

I'll try to be concise and coherent here, but forgive me if it's a bit all over the place.

The silent protagonist isn't the same as the blank slate, and neither is quite the same as the faceless protagonist. While the player is never subjected to the silent protagonist's thoughts in verbal form, he/she could very well have a clear personality. The example of Adol from Ys was brought up before. He doesn't speak. But his values are made clear throughout each game of the series simply by his actions.

The blank slate, on the other hand, offers the player considerably more control in their protagonist's values. Obvious choice: Shepard. Or Bioware's pre-ME player characters. Femnazi Shep vs. Ugly Shepard vs. whatever other Shepard. They're all completely different, and reflect the player rather than the character. And Shepard is in no way silent. He is in no way faceless. But each action he takes (with obvious limitations) is decided by the player, making him the blank slate.

Finally, the faceless protagonist, seen most often in visual novels, has a name, a backstory, and dialogue. Especially inner dialogue. But by omitting the specifics of his/her appearance, the player is supposed to feel as if they are the protagonist.

Personally, I prefer the silent protagonist. As mentioned above, having the protagonist speak, especially after being a silent protagonist for several games in a series, destroys whatever the character was beforehand. Most often, it's because developers and/or localizers like to troll, but that's a story for another time. (And suddenly, Link is a delinquent with a baseball bat and a bad attitude.)

[plasticandrage]

I have to say I originally was not a big fan of the silent protagonist, with the exception of Crono maybe. All his comedic physical reactions gave him a fun little personality coupled with the reactions of the other characters, Also it made the times he got serious all the more meaningful, like when a character who doesn't speak for entire game simply unsheathes his sword, it says more than when another character might. Anyway the point I was going to make uses Dragon Age as an example. Like I said I originally preferred when a main character had a personality of his own because I felt it made for a more in depth plot. I really really enjoyed DA:O and originally felt like using a silent main character, in contrast to the HEAVY development of all the other party characters, was a loss of a golden opportunity to include yet another brilliant character plot. However, I just bought DA 2 yesterday and I'm finding myself missing the silence of DA:O. I'm finding that most of the time I just want Hawke to shut up and say what I want him to say. I guess it's all in how a game is developed. For games like Dragon Age, or Elder Scrolls, where you have so many options to guide your characters personally through dialog, a main character with an already established personality is less necessary. But I think there definitely are games where it would be out of place. Final Fantasy for example, where the personalities of the main characters are such important plot points. I guess for me it all depends on what I'm in the mood for. If feel like something light hearted I can pick up something like Fallout and have fun torturing the poor by giving them irradiated water because i feel like it, and that's my characters personality, or I can pick up something like Final Fantasy and experience something a bit more serious and emotion driven. I think it works just as well either way. Just my opinion.

[Shareware]

I think games take the blank slate road too often these days. There are great characters out there, but most of what I see these days is a character where it's all up to you to build their personality. I dunno, it seems like there are fewer developers out there willing to put in the work to make a great lead character. Sure, there are crap characters around as well (I'm looking at you, Fenix), but personally, I feel its worth the risk to actually try and write them rather than leave it up to us.

Because whats more bland than a character that has nothing? As interesting as it has been guiding these blank slates along, I have never once really cared about them. Hell, more often than not, I cared more about the secondary and tertiary characters than I did about my guy.

[Gare]

I like protagonists with a defined personality, and whether or not that personality is defined by me or the game's developers isn't such a big issue to me. Let me elaborate: most western RPGs allow you to choose from a variety of dialogue options every time your protagonist opens his or her mouth. Think of Baldur's Gate or the more recent Dragon Age: Origins. As I've said in Milady's thread, by the end of DAO I had a pretty good idea of what my character's personality is like.

In many JRPGs you have little or no control over the protagonist's personality. As a player, I'm simply there to guide him and watch his story unfold - which is also fine by me. To me, both have their merits. Although, problems arise with a pre-defined personality when said personality is one I disagree with, and I end up feeling uncomfortable controlling and watching the story of someone I'm not especially fond of. Looking at you, Tidus. Go die in a fire. Thankfully, the opposite can also by true. [insert name of every awesome JRPG protagonist ever]

I suppose I'm not the biggest fan of completely silent protagonists. Take Gordon Freeman, for example. Sure, he might come off as a tough motherfucker who doesn't waste time on talking and just gets shit done. On the other hand, I had infinitely more fun playing through Crysis: Warhead, where you take on the role of a laid-back British soldier, cracking jokes left and right and generally being an awesome/badass dude. His personality and accent made him more likable than Gordon or even the protagonist of the original Crysis game. Type "I'm British, you muppet" into Youtube and you'll see what I mean.

Portal 2 also comes to mind - who do you think 99% of gamers will remember from that game? Chell? I don't think so. The obvious show stealers are either Wheatley, Cave Johnson or GLaDOS, depending on your preference. Or even the Space Core.

I dunno, maybe it's just me and the fact that I'm having a hard time relating to characters that say nothing and have little to no personality. And trying to relate to the main character is part of the whole process of getting immersed - to me, at least. I can't really do that with a protagonist like Crono. I barely know anything about the dude.

I'm not sure how I feel about hybrids, as far as dialogue choices are concerned in RPGs. Having a middle ground like that allows you to have Cloud hit on Tifa and even go on a date with her, yet still act the way he does after Sephiroth offs Aeris. That always felt a bit weird to me. If I'm not going to be able to affect anything, then don't give me choices. There are probably much better examples for this, but this is the first one that came to mind. Oh well.

You mentioned the good/evil choices in your post once. Like when you're being good not because you're a saint, but because it serves a purpose in that situation. This reminded me of certain games that allow for a situation like this:

Random girl: You'll save my father, won't you?

MC response:

1 - Yes, of course. Don't worry.
2 - [Lie] Yes, of course. Don't worry.

I like it when games do that.

[Frog Knight]

I think it really depends on the game, like mentioned before okami is a good example of when to use a silent protagonist, as is shadow of the colossus. Although if it is an rpg game i prefer the non silent protagonist, unless he has a crappy voice actor. That said Chrono Cross is my favorite rpg and that game has a silent protagonist.

[JKDarkside]

I think it really depends on the game, like mentioned before okami is a good example of when to use a silent protagonist, as is shadow of the colossus. Although if it is an rpg game i prefer the non silent protagonist, unless he has a crappy voice actor. That said Chrono Cross is my favorite rpg and that game has a silent protagonist.

Just to clarify, I don't believe Ray means a character with no voice acting but rather a character that has no lines.

What I would like to see in the next Zelda game is for Link to be from a different land with a different language. He can speak, just not the right language and very few people can really talk with him. Make him go on a quest with Zelda or someone high in the Hyrule ranks, use how people react around him to flesh hum out while using subtitles when he talks to himself. Then, you can really add to his character when people from his land start appearing.

A bit off topic, but this would be a good time to flesh out Ganondorf's character. The best we've ever gotten is that he hates Hyrule for how much his people suffered in the desert while they lived like kings. Use that by making him a patriot type of character who grows a relationship with this version of Link, showing when he finally went to evil You can also explain more of where Ganon came from, like how it's a monster from earlier in time that later joined with Ganondorf. While you're at it, introduce some of the other Zelda villains into the story, like Vaati being a tormented and crazed child with great power, Majora a dark god who plays a large part in the ultimate plans of the main villain, Zant as a powerful king who comes at odds with Hyrule due to political issues, ect.

[Frog Knight]

Just to clarify, I don't believe Ray means a character with no voice acting but rather a character that has no lines.

Yeah, i got that, i was just saying that with modern games companies seem to feel obligated to put voice acting in them, no matter how crappy the actor, i was perfectly fine with reading dialog.