Developing character

[lildragon]

http://www.thecareergamer.com/wp-content/uploads/2007/10/developing_character2.jpg

Hiya guys, I've recently written up an article on the importance of character development and ways to make your characters interesting through a back story.

Find it here,

http://www.thecareergamer.com/?p=155

Take care,

~t

[Marcus Dublin]

Thanks for posting dude, it was a fun read through.:)

[MaxH]

Interesting article
I shall assimilate this new knowledge to my creative output!!!
thanks
:)

[lildragon]

Happy to hear you guys liked it. More to come!

take care,

~t

[Dark Martian]

Everything you said in the article is what I do regularly when I create a char. It's nice to see I was on the right track. :-}

[Dark Martian]

It's nice to see I was on the right track in creating chars, I ask those questions to myself over and over about the char I am creating. Then I always ask my self : "Yeah, I think he/she/ it is interesting, but will other people?" Ask yourself that, you may only have a character that only you like an no one else.

[GOGO]

Hi lildragon, thanks for sharing

I did have one question however.

I wanted to avoid for my main character was the “empty vessel” design, in other words I wanted my character to have purpose, relationships, a connection with the world I have envisioned for them and so on

I assume by "empty Vessel" your referring to the sort of character design thats less focused on the sort of irrelevant details that only a developer needs to assist his design (hometown,siblings,faveourite food etc). But I think it would be better to discuss this design method a little further rather than push it aside considering many of the characters in your top 10 have been designed in this manner.

For example, the original Mario,Sonic,Link,Pacman,Samus and Snake (im talking original titles now) were all probbably created using your "empty vessel" term.

The empty vessel expression from what I understand of it, consists of creating a silhouette. A blank body that doesnt demand an instant (more often than not) cliche presence.

It doesnt ask the player to instantly subscribe to that characters existance "I am a sci fi marine, buy my game females". The empty vessel method can actually encourage the player to project their own personal ambitions and emotions onto the character, thus creating an intimate connection with the player from the start.

One of the best examples I can think of recent times is "ICO" or the protagonist in shadow of the colossus. Now I know both of these characters wont sell a franchise but thats not their intended purpose. When we look at ICO hes a very pale small child with horns...and thats it, you might mistake him for a girl, you might find the equally blank relationship with the princess interesting, you might even consider the boy to be you reincarnate. But thats the point, theres as little as possible between character and player. When you introduce foreign ideas not relevant to the world and its play mechanics your risking contradiction.

And you can see this method of design through out the now "retro" periods of gaming. Mario is nintendo mickey mouse, sonic is segas mario...pacman was famously envisioned from a pizza missing a slice...it goes on.

Im not trying to say an informed and well referenced character design is bad...far from it. But the tone in your article suggests that this is the best method of creating a character with purpose,relationships and connection to the world. On this I would probably disagree.

how much character back story went into this?
http://youtube.com/watch?v=bTrm4Yie4ow

[Ged]

Hi lildragon, thanks for sharing

I did have one question however.



I assume by "empty Vessel" your referring to the sort of character design thats less focused on the sort of irrelevant details that only a developer needs to assist his design (hometown,siblings,faveourite food etc). But I think it would be better to discuss this design method a little further rather than push it aside considering many of the characters in your top 10 have been designed in this manner.


I interpreted "empty vessel" differently, I think of it more as words to describe very generic characters that dont have an interesting design or memorable features. Ico is simple and not very descriptive but none the less a memorable character, particulary the way they interact with their game world makes him far from an empty vessel. The game narrative hinges on the players connection with ico and his goals. If Ico were truly an empty vessel, players would find it hard to connect with him and his intentions and as such motivation for further play would be minimal.

I interpret an empty vessel to be more like...quake guy, you play as him in 4 games and dont really care who he is or even get to see him very often, hes just a cool looking generic soldier.

His role as a character in the narrative and gameplay is unimportant, the gameplay could happen regardless of his existence. Thats what I enterpret as an empty vessel.

[GOGO]

Ico is simple and not very descriptive but none the less a memorable character, particulary the way they interact with their game world makes him far from an empty vessel. The game narrative hinges on the players connection with ico and his goals. If Ico were truly an empty vessel, players would find it hard to connect with him and his intentions and as such motivation for further play would be minimal.

I understand what your saying Ged, however these goals are your interpretations as the player. your mapping intentions and motivation over the character as your presented with the mechanics of the game world, you learn the rules of the world and how to succeed by exploring the environment. The character ends up being memorable because you consider your actions memorable. The games narrative hinges on the players connection with ico and your goals.

[lildragon]

Perfectly stated Ged, exactly my thinking when I used that particular term.

GOGO you made some interesting points but let me address a few

It doesnt ask the player to instantly subscribe to that characters existance "I am a sci fi marine, buy my game females". The empty vessel method can actually encourage the player to project their own personal ambitions and emotions onto the character, thus creating an intimate connection with the player from the start.

I think here you're bordering on a totally different type of gameplay here, like most causal games on the market you're essentially using the "pawn" as a means to justify your actions, it's not demanding or assuming anything in particular, just go through the motions and you'll eventually achieve your goals, hence being soulless or "empty" in it's existence.

What I was referring to is a character much like a good actor would draw you into their particular world in a convincing manner, essentially you would want to invest time into their story (this is the key here) as opposed to dreaming up your own as you seem to be stating here.


Im not trying to say an informed and well referenced character design is bad...far from it. But the tone in your article suggests that this is the best method of creating a character with purpose,relationships and connection to the world. On this I would probably disagree.

And yes this is were we would disagree, and by stating "probably" in what you've depicted here it would make it seem like you're unsure of your own thoughts.

I really think you're taking this to another plateau altogether, you're getting into what wasn't intended for the article. I'm not talking psychology or deeper realms of our psyche, just what makes a character memorable and not actually "becoming" the character.

At any rate thanks for your thoughts! Appreciated that you read the article and made your own interpretation.

Take care,

~t

[Snowfly]

Let's the brief calls for something like a non-descript boxy humanoid figure, with barely enough resolution in the face to convey emotion, and rectangular prisms for limbs. What sort of treatments do you give that kind of figure to make it something the player can feel connected to, without giving the character too much character of its own?

[cookepuss]

Think back to 20-25 years ago. How did artists back then make you care about the characters when some were barely a 16x16 pixels big? How did they make you part of the process without letting the character overshadow things? Balance.

With some characters, especially like the one you described, have to be "painted" in broader strokes. How does a mime convey emotion when he can't speak? Pose. Posture. Arcs of motion. In a case like that, its much harder to let the character emote through design. Its one of those things where a nice character sheet can act as your design spec. You have to assess that set of poses or arcs. Do they keep you in the heat of things or do they draw your eye in to them? Do they contribute to the gameplay or to the character?

Even a stick figure can act. Animate a pencil sketch of a stick figure. If you can make that character scary, scared, or triumphant then you know that minimalistic design doesn't necessarily make for boring and emotionless end results. A large combination of factors contribute to the psychology and believability of character work. Conversely, even a stick figure can over act and ham it up. :)

Sometimes, placing the character against another character of contrasting design or motion can make your protagonist's emotions or intentions that much clearer. At the same time, they can prolong the melodrama and overstate the characterization. Balance.

You don't need a face to emote. You don't need a voice to scream. Sure, all of that helps, but there are so many ways to develop your character into a believable hero or villain even when you've got a bare minimum with which to work. Hell, the Pong paddle could have been considered a character. One of the reasons we didn't make it as much of one was because we didn't need to. We transferred that role of hero, in part, to ourselves.

So, in that regard, it helps if the viewers or players are willing to accept that certain things are true. If the human in the real world wants to feel that this character is in peril, celebration, or attack mode then that's what is true.

Yoda was barely more than a sock puppet with some guy's hand up his arse. Still, we believed that he was an ancient powerhouse and a sagacious mentor because we wanted it to be true. We threw reality to the wind.

That's just my opinion though.

As far as not overdoing it.... Don't. :) You know when you've gone overboard. When the design, the actions, the animations, or anything else is overshadowing your primary goals or your forward progress.... you've gone too far. It's like stopping the game to watch an cinematic, something the Final Fantasy games have been accused of time and again. If it takes you out of the moment then you're doing something wrong. Part of finding out if you've gone too far or not far enough is part intuition and part trial/error.

I'm sure that Lildragon here has a unique POV, but I'm just tossing in my $1.02. (Haven't read the thread all the way through so I probably missed or duped some points made herein. Then again, I probably make zero sense. :p)


Nice article, btw, Tito.

[East]

[...] It's like stopping the game to watch an cinematic, something the Final Fantasy games have been accused of time and again. If it takes you out of the moment then you're doing something wrong. [...]
Not necessarily, I think. Cinematics in games like Metal Gear solid and Final Fantasy may seem excessive to some, but to some of us this is a recipe of huge success. I buy these games immediately the second they hit the shelves, because I look forward to these cutscenes in particular, their direction, and the story they tell, more so than the actual gameplay. I often end up with goose bumps and get very emotional.

A good example is a game like Lost Odyssey (get it here (http://www.play-asia.com/paOS-13-71-dw-49-en-70-2iys.html)), where you get so-called dream scenes, wherein you actually read a short story each time this occurs, taking between 5 and 15 minutes. If anything, this totally brings you out of the moment, but hey, it's okay, because it's so well written and adds so much to the game.

I usually get comments like "then go read a book instead" or "rent a movie and watch it", but no, I'm not going to do that, since this is my gaming experience and I love it, and in Lost Odyssey I've become more attached to the main protagonist than most other ones.

So to me, taking you out of the moment is totally fine, as long as you do it right. People who hate this just have to buy other games, as these are clearly not games made for them. :)

[Snowfly]

hey thanks for the thoughts cookepuss. i think your post sums up why lego men are so enduring. i was just tossing the question up, because character design particularly in games isn't always about creating potential mascots. i'm also interested in what went on in the character design department for spore...

good article by the way lildragon!

[GOGO]

And yes this is were we would disagree, and by stating "probably" in what you've depicted here it would make it seem like you're unsure of your own thoughts.

Im not unsure of my thoughts but I am slightly conflicted having studied lots of mind bending academia concerning character design, played many games both good and bad and also practice character design in a similar way to your own method. Its not something original to game design its the typical sort of character creation profile you would find in any screenplay,comic or novel. Im not saying this is a bad technique for comprising well thought out characters but I would say its more helpful to the designer than the game as a whole presented to the player.

I think here you're bordering on a totally different type of gameplay here, like most causal games on the market you're essentially using the "pawn" as a means to justify your actions, it's not demanding or assuming anything in particular, just go through the motions and you'll eventually achieve your goals, hence being soulless or "empty" in it's existence.

Im sure the games your thinking about probably did just drag you through the motions and left you empty and cold. But there is nothing casual about this method of character design. Is World of Warcraft merely casual? The characters have set classes, abilities and generic models but this isnt the sort of intimate gameplay you would find in any single player game. Players go through the motions and eventually achieve goals but the core mechanic of wow remains the same from level 1. Would those players agree that their created avatars are soulless or empty?

What I was referring to is a character much like a good actor would draw you into their particular world in a convincing manner, essentially you would want to invest time into their story (this is the key here) as opposed to dreaming up your own as you seem to be stating here.

essentially as a real person I cant relate to tales of fantasy, sci-fi action and super mario world, but my personal interactions within these worlds give me hope, if its engaging enough Ill explore a little further. the personal history of the character is more often than not irrelevant...my personal goals come first.


I'm sure that Lildragon here has a unique POV, but I'm just tossing in my $1.02. (Haven't read the thread all the way through so I probably missed or duped some points made herein. Then again, I probably make zero sense. )

You make perfect sense :lucky:

So to me, taking you out of the moment is totally fine, as long as you do it right. People who hate this just have to buy other games, as these are clearly not games made for them.

East's goals come first.

[cookepuss]

Not necessarily, I think. Cinematics in games like Metal Gear solid and Final Fantasy may seem excessive to some, but to some of us this is a recipe of huge success. I buy these games immediately the second they hit the shelves, because I look forward to these cutscenes in particular, their direction, and the story they tell, more so than the actual gameplay. I often end up with goose bumps and get very emotional.
Me too. I was specifically referring to the summon animations, which really got out of hand at one point in the series. That's what taking focus away. I like a good cut scene myself too.

[East]

I can agree with you there. Cutscenes that you can't skip are horrid. In FFVII it could take a long time, but it was good for potty breaks. I drank a lot of cola while playing that game..

[Ged]

I understand what your saying Ged, however these goals are your interpretations as the player. your mapping intentions and motivation over the character as your presented with the mechanics of the game world, you learn the rules of the world and how to succeed by exploring the environment. The character ends up being memorable because you consider your actions memorable. The games narrative hinges on the players connection with ico and your goals.

heh thought I would reply as this is an interesting discussion and Im writing my dissertation on stuff to do with game design.

Yes I am mapping intentions and motivation over the character, but I am doing so in a way that the game designer intended, therefore I am fulfilling the games designers goals rather than my own and often the games designers goals involve getting players to feel a strong connection with the player character.

“ a good videogame character is one that the player likes, one whose iconic appearance and movements give us pleasure. And since the player is under our control, if we like him (or her) we must also feel somehow protective, and anxious lest we cause the character harm through our own inadequacy.” Game On, Character Forming, Pg 81

I dont consider my actions memorable when I play a game, all I do is press buttons, the character does the rest and in this I find enjoyment and immersion. So when I am presented with the characters goals I then take those goals as my own, therefore narrative and ultimately progression through the game hinges on the players connection with the character, the game world and the characters goals in that world. This is particularly true for adventure games like ico though Im sure there are some exceptions to this idea.

[GOGO]

Yes I am mapping intentions and motivation over the character, but I am doing so in a way that the game designer intended, therefore I am fulfilling the games designers goals rather than my own and often the games designers goals involve getting players to feel a strong connection with the player character.

Obviously the designer wants to always create wonderful emotional and engaging games, but every designer has to make sure the player is stimulated every step of the way. I would like to think the goals of the designer consist of doing everything in their power to make each individual moment incredible...I would hate to think that the majority of designers just want to drag me through an epic storyline ripped straight from a 700 page design doc. If anything its merely garnish or a typical commercial need to justify the action on screen with plot.

Again every designer wants you to find their characters engaging but this isnt the result of a good character history or backstory. Strong connections with a character are the result of quality interaction in real time. The designer is relying on basic human instincts (survival,reward,punishment,curiosity) to make sure you operate their game properly. If you really think your personal actions are meaningless and dont facilitate enjoyment and immersion then I suggest you start reading your games rather than playing them.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------

“ a good videogame character is one that the player likes, one whose iconic appearance and movements give us pleasure. And since the player is under our control, if we like him (or her) we must also feel somehow protective, and anxious lest we cause the character harm through our own inadequacy.” Game On, Character Forming, Pg 81

Game study "Super Street Fighter"

Designer pits player against computer in bouts of non avoidable combat (survival).

Player selects a universal array of characters. inputs commands to strike with punches and kicks, inputting a chain can result in a more powerful strike coupled with unique exciting animations and graphics (reward).

Player loses round when their energy bar has been depleted (punishment)

----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Now I understand that street fighter characters have their own personal profile of stats and history, and an ending sequence as a reward for completing the game...but if thats the main reason why those characters are engaging ............:brick:

If your suddenly mugged in the street at gun point how engaging would the mugger be? if he told you to run down the street while he tries to shoot out your ankles would you do it and try to escape with your life? or would you tackle him for the 7th dragon ball and wish princess tomato back to life? It comes down to you playing the game or the game playing you...personally I have no time for Hollywood inspired games

http://youtube.com/watch?v=M58mphwR55I

Rez

[Ged]

It comes down to you playing the game or the game playing you...personally I have no time for Hollywood inspired games



I think I very much agree with what youve said in your last post, in fact I believe I was saying a very similar thing in different words. I guess this last line is where we differ in opinion. I dont believe it does come down to you playing the game or the game playing you. I dont mind games inspired by hollywood as long as they take the best parts and leave the rest haha. Why does there need to be any distinction between what you want and what the game wants? Its the basis for narrative in many games.

“Tim Schafer, lead designer of Lucasarts's Grim Fandango, explains, the challenge of a game designer is to “lead the player along a predetermined pathway without making them feel that they are being controlled”. Game On, The art of contested spaces, 69

I did say there are probably exceptions to these rules. Particulary because narrative and character play large parts in action adventure or mystery games but rather small parts in many other games, like your example of a beat em up. But even in street fighter I think the game designers have spent alot of time making their characters look fun, move in a way that the players enjoy and have strong designs that are recognisable and show elements of a particular culture or style.
Therefore would you still want to play street fighter if it looked like it was drawn by a 3 year old and every character looked boring and the same as every other character? no probably not...and thats because street fighter was well designed and makes you want to play it. It isnt "playing you" or manipulating you in a negative but its making you want to play it, your goals and the goal of the game have aligned. I think we can probably agree on this?

[GOGO]

yea for sure, but dont misunderstand me. Aesthetic design traits and nuances of character presentation wasnt what I wanted to focus this discussion on. Merely the written design process of designing a character. When I say things like "you play the game or the game plays you" what im trying to describe is the scenario of the rat in a maze. The rat has as many options as the maze provides it, we add elements of reward and punishment by giving the rat food and a goal to achieve. The goals of the experiment and the goals of the rat become the same because its equally beneficial to both parties. By hollywood I mean all talk/hype and no action.

“Tim Schafer, lead designer of Lucasarts's Grim Fandango, explains, the challenge of a game designer is to “lead the player along a predetermined pathway without making them feel that they are being controlled”. Game On, The art of contested spaces, 69

This is a great quote as it highlights the role of a designer opposed to the typical assumed role of allot of designers I know who think its their job to promote and stoke notions of the fanboy.

It isnt "playing you" or manipulating you in a negative

Every game manipulates, I would never say in a negative way. If street fighter was made of stickmen with the same design, yea I would still play it, obviously I doubt it would still have the same success but as a design its near perfect. I havnt really disagreed with you in the majority of your points because they are your interperation as the player. But as ive been trying to highlight since my first post, a good character design may start in the over detailed notes of the designer but it certainly doesnt end untill its in the players hands couppled with all the other elements of the game...box and manual included.