What makes characters attractive to the player?
 

This is something I have been thinking about recently. I am also thinking about it for Tactica.

What makes characters in RPG's attractive? Is it that I develop unique characters myself, is it their cool personality, is it perhaps how they look? or what background story they have? Or something else?

Personally I found that either I enjoy characters because of their personality, J-rpgs are usually superior in flashing out characters, and have much better characters in this way compared to western RPG's IMHO.

As for western RPG's I strangely find that I get much more attached to my wizardry 8 characters ( which I created and they don't really have any story or background ). Than I do to most bioware RPG's / other western RPG's where they have a story. Probably because I think a lot of these characters are kind of boring and unrealistic.

Besides you have the lovely stat in wiz 8 showing how many they killed how many times they died and such a things. It is just fun to see how my feary alchemist has by far the biggest kill count. While my Valkyrie warrior didn't even die once…..

Betrayel at Krondor is an exception though, I loved the characters in that game, probably because they are made by a professional writer who knows how to get the characters right.

I would also like to expand this to NPC's and enemies.

I found that the characters is probably the single most important for me, to like a game or a movie these days. Of course depending on what kind of movie / game it is.

To me, it's their personality to a huge deal.
Plus, everything that makes them odd, and *not* forgettable.
A "fairy alchemist" in itself is something very odd to me : Which games offer these combinations ? And fairies as playable characters at all ?

In the town of Cologne here in Germany - and elsewhere, too - there's the kind of person which is an "Original". The keeper of Boo would be such a person : Not necessarily a good person, but standing out (sometimes even literally !) by eccentric, but at least non-standard behaviour, voice, gestures, hobbies … you name it.
Cologne examples would be Tünnes and Schäl. Tünnes and his ounterpart Schäl are in fact invented puppet figures : They have never lived - yet they became THE "Originals" of Cologne !
More "Originals" of Cologne (in this article partly portrayed by actors) : http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kölsche_Originale

Every major town has these "Originals". Nowadays they tend not to be seen, though, because in bigger towns newspapers etc. just don't notice them.
In smaller towns or even in villages, where "everyone knows everyone", "Oiginals" become known much, much faster.

Edit : There's also the danger of exaggerating a character in his description as an "Original", by the way, that's the only danger I can see right now.

As far as looks go, I absolutely hate characters that have facial tattoos. I don't like any branding, but facial branding is really bad. I feel sorry for cattle that get branded, and yet humans do it to themselves on purpose. At least most of them don't use a huge hot iron! I've noticed tattoos have become extremely popular, at least in the USA, in the last 15 years. Same goes with piercings all over the place, like the freaky mage dude in the Witcher. Gross!

I agree : I don't like tattoo on the face.
I'm okay with other body parts, however.

There is a single exception in my rule : This : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tā_moko

I'm not sure why, but the characters I remember from RPGs are:
Diego, Gorn (big axe), The old ghoul in Fallout1/2, the Hashishin in GIII, Brotherhood of Steel Fallout, HK-47 KOTOR, Mandalore KOTOR (big gun), Mutant NPC KOTOR, Butch in Gothic, damn him for punching me.

Probably some others too, but I guess those are the ones that stick out… I would always remember HK-47, I think he was amazing… Good humor, history and you need to get all of his pieces to make him work, makes him even more valuable. The old ghoul with a tree growing on his head in Fallout was great too and would have been good to see him more.

I want a new KOTOR :(


Also, I think a 'history' book that gets written as you progress in the game is really good. Like in MM7. It's really fun to read about your adventures through the eyes of a party 'scribe' :)

I can post some entries to show what I mean if you're interested.

yes, go ahead with posting… I actually want a bard or some such to play a part. Wizardry is the only game I know where the bard is truly unique for being a bard.

It's personality and story primarily for me. Visual is somewhat important too (for instance I thought Iomen in BG was too cute to not have in my party), but I enjoy characters that my relationship to them builds throughout the game based on how I interact with them.

I thought there was a bard in Betrayal at Krondor …Maybe not to play. I only played part of it a long time ago so I don't remember.

Here are a few excerpts : Might contain spoilers for the story!!!!! Be forewarned !

This is once your party gets to Harmondale.
Getting tired of copying from the book, but it basically goes on to tell the whole story of the party. Well, all the major events, not the tiny subquests or whatever, but the main storyline, whether you follow the side of Good or Evil in the game.

I thought the gnome bard in NWN2 was pretty decent and he was also a nice buff caster for combat. In NWN Deekin was cute, but many hated him.

GG, how much time do you spend with each Wiz8 character picking the "right" voice? While I think the key to getting attached to characters is lots of opportunity to develop them (just like raising kids), having some mechanism to give the toons a unique personality seems like a rather important icing on the cake. It seems rather trivial given that there's no real effect on gameplay stemming from those choices, but the combinations of race, class, portrait, and voice make every toon unique—every baby looks different.

Know what I've always wanted for Wiz8? Additional voices. I want a female voice that screams "Shaniqua" and a male voice that says "Billybob's brother Darrell". I want Monty Python and Mr. Bean. I want Courtney Love and Julie Andrews. Give me "Sham-Wow" and "Ancient Chinese Secret". To hell with political correctness and give me some personalities. The beauty of it is that you're not really talking that much additional code. Each voice set has maybe 20 lines and I'm sure the program is set up with generic pointers. You're talking tremendous extension to the game without that much effort.

I spent literally hours going thru online custom portrait files for NWN back in the day. Does something like that matter to the gameplay? Of course not, but you're going to be spending lots of time with your "game baby" and he/she needs to look right.

Think about how Sammy and Jaz play Morrowind. Their equipment choices are based on looks. Crazy! I'm too much of a spreadsheet gamer to lose my optimized gear arrangement because the color's wrong, but I've got a ton of respect for the way those two develop an image in their head and then bring it to life in the game. And for all the countless, and I mean countless, flaws in Morrowind, they made it possible for Jaz and Sammy to individualize their babies in ways that had absolutely no impact on mechanics.

I'm not like dte… I don't care much for the voices unless they're annoying me, the portraits are only mildly important to me. I played all of MM7 and while the portraits did serve as some fun, I would probably not have noticed if they were just blobs of color representing characters either.

This is a character you'll remember forever : Eilif of Drakensang 2

Hmm, I've played the River of Time, who's Eilif?

This woman ;) : http://www.blutschwerter.de/f4-das-s…idsdottir.html (This is a discussion about her)
Other picture (a screenshot, actually) .http://drakensang2.wikia.com/wiki/Da…onnerfaust.jpg
Another picture of her (and her group of Thorwalians) : http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_e0leTAVmZG…ifs+Schatz.bmp (The same picture in a PDF "demo" of a pen & paper solo-adventure : http://www.dasschwarzeauge.de/filead…z_Vorschau.pdf )

Eilif ? A typical Thorwalian and Thorwalians are streamlined Vikings ;)

OT:
For my Player-Character I can create something like a Fighter/Mage in D&D; a Sword in one hand, a fireball in the other and I'm happy; it also helps when I'm not shoehorned into a nice do-gooder; that irked me enormous in Drakensang 1 and even a bit in DraSa 2; I prefer the fake bioware-Choices in this Case ;)
Let me at least play an impolite Mercenary; if there are consequences for this it's even better :)

Loyality is what impresses me most with NPCs; i.e. when you went into hell in Baldur's Gate and your Party would stand beside you, even if they don't have to - Loyality that has to be worked for (but not simply flatter them enough) is even more interesting (like in MotB).

The last time I was impressed was when I captured an evil Jailor in DraSa 2 and decided to kill him (he had no mercy for the innocent prisoners, so why should I risk to let him live ?) and got a *lot* of complaints from two of my three companions. Especially the high moral values of Kano, a Rogue/Cleric of God of thieves and merchants, surprised me.

back to the original topic, to me personally I don't like characters with 'too much attitude'. When it's overdone then it loses believability. Good characters that are not stupid, that can bend the rules a bit here and there, and evil characters that are not 'a cute kitty… KILL!' but more subtle about it.
Basically, characters that are believable. Just because the game is set in a fantasy world that doesn't mean the characters need to be extreme to the point of ridiculous.

I agree with wolfing there.
Part of what I enjoyed in MM7 and disliked in KOTOR. The evil side in KOTOR was usually just kill or steal whatever you can while the good side was help every single person on the planet, no matter what.
In MM7 being evil meant helping one of the factions, which usually were just more selfish and cared not for other but for themselves. Unfortunately the gameplay didn't allow for much of the non-killing part, but the story made more sense.

But not THAT SIZE !!! ;)

Wow, you actually remember this? How flattering :).

While I enjoy well-written predefined characters (like in JRPGs… just like GG said), I get most out of creating my own from scratch - and I'm not talking about stats here. I play around with visuals a lot (the more options the better), and once I made a character I think I might like, his or her backstory starts to emerge in my mind; this in turn is what makes me decide on my char's path in the game, on their actions, reactions and, of course, the equipment they use. In Daggerfall, for example… if I can have a hot Ohmes-Raht Khajiit fighter, why would I cover them with armor if they can wear thongs instead? What, amor helps in a fight? Then fight better so you won't need it! Hehe. And why would I use a Daedric blade if the green Orcish blade fits my dress better? Forget the +2 bonus. Style is more important. Especially if it says something about the character.

If it's about predefined, prefabricated characters, then choice usually is a 'looks first, specialty second' thing for me. I mean, I just started to play Drakensang; while I actually like to play Battlemages, my final choice here was between the female warrior and male burglar because I liked their looks. When sonny asked me which character I picked and I told him 'The burglar', he just said, 'I should have known. You love to take other people's stuff in games.'
And here, too, I use the equipment that fits a) my characters' specializations and b) looks/demeanor.

Well, in short I'd say visual customization options are important for me, or if I can't have those at least give me a host of chars to choose from.

Oh definitely, my characters have to be desktop-wallpaper worthy or I'm simply not happy ='.'=

Of course I like better gear stat-wise, but my crippling superficiality has another benefit as well - it keeps the game challenging long after my toons would have been omnipotent had I min/maxxed them to death. I'm so totally against always doing the "right thing" as far as skill choices, gear choices, companion choices, dialogue choices, whatever. So boring, what a downright chore trying to figure out the rubix cube of a perfect playthru.

Throw caution to the wind, use that cool looking standard issue inferior fire sword instead of the God Sword of Fury. Use the weapon or armor that means something to your character because it was their deceased companion's, or they won it an a particularly nasty boss fight. What would your character use?

No, I'm in it for the fun of seeing my virtual creation alive and making their way thru their world, and of course looking great whilst they do it.. To me, that's a key component of "role-playing"

What Sammy said :).

I'm so totally stat-driven. I don't care at all how the characters look. I'd rather have an ugly sword +3 than a beautiful sword +2.

For me, it's their personality and story. Something deep and interesting. Distinctive look also helps. For example, Vivi from FF IX. I've been to Distant worlds concert in Sydney opera house recently (my fiance is big FF fan). When they were performing Vamo' Alla Flemenco, Vivi's appearance really caught my eyes. From there on, I looked up his story on wiki and such, it was really sad and interesting. Now I'm trying to find a copy of FF IX to play :X

Other examples are from BG2; Anomen is classic example for me :p

Have you played any of the other FF games? Most fans either loved or hated FF IX. I hated it. The characters reminded me of a Disney movie. I have fond memories of FF IV-VII though. Especially IV&VI.

I used to like JRPGs a lot more before I started playing games like Baldur's Gate. :)


Ugh… I love BG2, but Anomen was a whiny little bitch. ;)

I'm not a spreadsheet gamer but wouldn't sacrifice efficiency for look, but I remember have done one exception, few wearing stuff in Drakensang, some hat/helm but also few other stuff. But that was a careful balance between a more funny look and not lost much on efficiency.

About the attractive characters, I suppose there's multiple aspects and some are very dependent of the player. I mean some traits would make a character attractive for some players and the same traits would make it unattractive for some other players.

Nope. Never played a single FF game in my life :p I know, my fiance warned me about FF IX. He hated it too. But I just really want to see Vivi's story first hand.

He recommended me to play FF VII, VIII (his favourite) or FF X. I know a little about FF X. It does sound quite sad and interesting. Might go through them all one day. For now though, really want to give FF IX a try.

I like him :p

I liked FF IX a lot, but I also like Disney, and Kingdom Hearts. Vivi's story was so sad ;(. FF IX made me shed some tears, anyway.

The nice thing about the FF games IMHO is that they are all very unique… and it is guaranteed to be an interesting experience each time. That also means some of them are going to piss some fans off…… obviously…

Obviously, a highly subjective thing.

Personally, I really enjoy plausible characters - even if I can't fully relate to them. As long as their motives make some kind of sense in the end, I can appreciate most characters for that alone.

I don't like "over-the-top" characters unless there's an obvious humor element. Characters like HK-47 in KotOR worked well, because it was about humor and not meant to be taken really seriously. Also, it was a droid.

I despise characters that are there to stand out and make an impression right away. This reminds me of modern TV-shows where they have to "sell it" in 5 minutes. Most intelligent beings have nuances and they have positives and negatives. A good example would be the dwarf character in Dragon Age 2 - that just SCREAMED for attention. Bioware have gotten steadily worse in that way, but they were never really good at creating fully realised characters.

Bioware's idea of a hero is one with supreme morality except for that one time when he accidentally got drunk and sad a few bad things to his parents. It's my firm belief that pretty much all human beings are balanced in terms of their good sides and bad sides - but based on what their experiences have been.

There is no such thing as a "true hero" - unless his conditioning allowed for that to happen, and even then - there will be significant downsides. As a race, we simply don't have the resources to do everything right in all ways.

Naturally, I like characters that push the "norm" as long as the writing supports it. I like how Geralt is a plausible hero - because he's modified in a way that works within the low-fantasy setting. The writer(s) obviously made a great effort to establish how his abilities were enhanced and at what cost.

As you can imagine, I absolutely despise JRPGs for their characters. Little school-girls with huge eyes and LEGO hair - begging to be raped by demons - just don't do it for me. I guess I'm not into that particular fetish. I've played maybe 20-30 JPRGs for anything from a few minutes to a few hours - and without exception, it's the characters that take me out of the games first. The whole thing just doesn't make sense to me, and I can't relate to any of it.

To me, there's nothing easier than to write the extreme. Writing about Gods and Demons and the destruction of worlds is what I consider incredibly boring. It's all "out the ear" writing and you can do it as a 10 year old.

No, I much prefer writing that has its core in reality - and with the maturity to understand how intelligent beings operate and what their motives are.

I CAN enjoy black/white universes like Tolkien, if it remains consistent and is otherwise loyal to its own world. If characters all behave according to that specific universe for very specific and well-detailed reasons - I can accept that it's not really like my own world. It just has to make sense, is all.

I stated elsewhere that I want games for

- being fun
- entertainment
- being a means for pure escapism (meaning that I REALLY don't want to have real-life themes in my games)

and thus I clearly prefer "good vs. evil" with clear borders.

For entertainment. For fun. For relaxing.

I have more than evnough shades of grey in my real life.

And that's why I also prefer characters to be either that or the other way.

Well, you can add a fourth….. I use games for exercising my brain… that's why most recent games don't work.

Okay, that's possible, too … Personally, I'd rather use TBS games for that …

I like characters with their own agendas, that don't necessarily correlate with the main story of a game. One of my main complaints with Dragon Age (not the exception by any means) was that characters would join the party and stay for the entire adventure, outside of extreme parameters. To me, that took some personality away from the characters.

I guess I prefer worlds and characters with shades of grey as opposed to black and white.

I'm somewhat the same way. Even in DDO, which is basically nothing but hp, dps, and "hjeal me naow!", my characters for the most part start to develop a personality in my head. In one case, Mirys the Half-Elven Favored Soul, she has even started to get written into part of my own game. This is a character and name created specifically for DDO, and the concept I built around her class and prestige line, "Angel of Vengeance".

Ijii the Bard also has a developed personality, though the name was taken from a freeware platformer. Accordingly, my Paladin Rachail lacks one, as I've grown to dislike the pure melee type in DDO. Oddly, while Aerii has seen much more play than anyone else in my roster, she only has a bit more development than Rachail.

A number of NPCs from my game also migrated from older CRPGs such as Phantasie III and Bard's Tale, where they managed to grow on me years ago and remain with me in some fashion. They were characters I created and built, and despite the limitations of the engine and game, I found a personality developing around those green or black text names with no unique portraits, and no dialog choices.

Many of the characters traveled from Skara Brae to the Proving Grounds of the Mad Overlord; onward to Varn, Cron, Terra, and Xeen, were the Lords of Harmondale, fought the Dark Savant, and traveled the Sword Coast and up into Icewind Dale, and even into the lands of Krynn.

It is a rare jRPG which holds my attention for long. Some times, it's the anime art style, but most often it's the cardboard cutout characters, the generic-seeming plot, and the overall lack of choice (most I've played are linear, go here, do this, then go here, ad infinitum) which drive me away. I can count on one finger the number of jRPGs I've replayed through, and one hand the number I've played extensively or bothered to finish.

It's actually a rare cRPG that I can't create my characters in that I play for long too. It's why I've been reluctant to buy the Witcher; I just don't get into games with a set protagonist, someone that I have to play as.

On the other hand, some of my favorites are the Baldur's Gate and Ultima games, where you create one character then recruit the rest of your troop. I think it makes the one I create even more alive to me, to actually have them interact with others regularly, that I didn't know of beforehand.

I can relate to that. I hate NPCs who sticks by you no-matter-what. That really isn't realistic. I do prefer making my own customizable PC, and get to choose my own party members. That's one thing I'm worried about FF series (when I finally get my copy of IX). I don't like being stuck with party members I grow to hate/dislike. That's just excerise of frustration. Also, I usually dislike playing preset PC, such as The Witcher and even Planescape: Torment. Don't get me wrong. Torment has fantastic story, but I prefered reading novelised version online then actually playing the game. It doesn't feel very comfortable, being forced to be someone I am not.

It's interesting to read different perspectives on how people like to play games. For me personally I usually prefer games with pre-set characters. I feel the story suffers in games where you create your character and also for me I am always playing a character no matter what, I never consider that I am playing myself.

I think Ultima had a good balance between these two opposing styles of character creation. It was supposed to be you in this world and then you are going to another world where you have an established history and friends, but you still choose your name, gender look, etc.

"Heal me meow !" ;)

Yeah, he lasted about 3 seconds in my party. Bitch had to go!

I agree, to an extent.

From BG2:

I think for a lot of people, that is a bit of a lost art from a bygone age. I remember fondly fleshing out all the character personas for my party in Ultima's IV through VII. In VI and VII obviously they had a little more life to them, but even in IV and V, I really had developed love/hate relationships with them.

I think the game gave just enough little hints about them (like Iolo playing the lute while you are camping) that combined with other in game mechanics (like Jaana never being able to hit the broad side of a barn) that it was natural to just develop a personality around them.

For instance, I hated Dupre. Didn't like that guy at all. Not sure why exactly, but he annoyed me. How do you get that from a monochrome 2-D sprite with virtually no text? Fun times.