Premade vs. generic protagonist

[Snorkack]

Both approaches can have their appeal. I gotta say, in a story-heavy title I'd prefer a decently written premade protagonist over a blank slate which is forced by the game into the stereotypical warm-hearted hero role any day.

 

[Xathrodox86]

I like to make a protagonist myself, but a well generated one (Deus Ex) can work just as well.

Oh and now I have a deja vu.

 

[Leshy]

My favorite is the in-between one. Have a pre-made character skeleton. Enough to push you into the world and get the story going. But the details, the things that make the character interesting, the flesh so to speak, should be of your own choosing.
In a way it makes sense from the perspective of a cRPG construction. The developer decides how you ended up in the gamed world, but you decided what you do there and what kind of person you are.

 

[DavidBVal]

Largely depends on what the game is trying to achieve. There's no universal answer to this. But I would say full customization can never be wrong, while in zero customization you begin walking down the path of CYOA/graphic adventures with stats.

Of course a game that goes 100% into one of the options, better know what they're doing. There's games (many of the classics) where you customize not just the protagonist, but a full party, and it works great because it's all about combat, build optimization, and exploration, and the world is not THAT reactive to your characters' identity, nor it really needs to be. On the other hand, you could never pull that off if you try to make a game like PS:T, but the key is, having developers that understand what they're sacrificing, and able to give us something worthy in exchange.

Sadly, that's not often the case.

 

[undecaf]

Geralt, for example, is way too rigidly defined for what and who he.

I disagree. The Witcher games would completely fall apart without Geralt, as everything from the quests to the character system and from the main story to every bit of dialogue is made with Geralt's character in mind.

That's kind of the point.

There are some merits to a more defined main character like more personalized narrative and quest design and shit, and I don't think it's really all that "anti-RPG" if it's - what ever comes with it, character systems, narrative choices, world interaction - crafted with a broader spectrum of interactivity in mind. But Geralt does fall out from that and feels too defined to me to really offer anything interesting aside from some of the stories told in the world. Be the games official genre what ever, there's very little feeling of "playing an RPG" there as far as I'm concerned.

 

[GameGear]

Having a premade character sucks ass, and The Witcher series in particular is one of the worst offenders. You mean to tell me there's all these witchers that exist and I'm still stuck as Geralt? It's like making a Rainbow Six game and you can only play as Ding or Clark.

The lone exception to the premade character rule is Deus Ex because the gameplay doesn't blow ass and you can roleplay JC Denton as a psychopath or a stealth master and the game world reacts to this, which is where Witcher's suckiness extends beyond its limited roleplaying to its abysmal gameplay. Deus Ex allows you to make choices without you even realising it. Witcher games rarely have this subtlety.

 

[Ulminati]

Unless the game has a really, REALLY good story, I prefer a blank slate. Since most games havre mediocre-to-shit stories, I'll go with those more often than a premade protagonist.

 

[Lurker King]

This dichotomy is only a problem giving the usual lack of resources, time and willingness to implement a decent story with real choices on it. For instance, I think that AoD solved this dilemma by implementing factions and robust reactivity. If you are an assassin, you have a background that is there for you, so this is somewhat (premade), but you can make different viable builds and have very different outcomes based on your choices.

 

[Sigourn]

Self generated character for me. I can't get into games with pre-made protagonists, especially if the plot heavily relies on them to the point you don't feel attached to the character.

I played Deus Ex: Human Revolution for a couple days. And, shitty gameplay/animations/dialogue aside, I just couldn't focus on the game. That I played first-person only for the game to go third-person when talking to people really made me feel detached from the main character, especially if I was playing in first person and heard his voice.

I'd much rather have a self generated, silent (no voice acting) protagonist. Otherwise, the gameplay has to be REALLY good, the choices have to be REALLY good, and the story has to be EXCELLENT for me to enjoy the game. If none of those work, then I'm just playing a movie I could be watching.

 

[Mozg]

I like self-made with a flexible background hook with continuing implications, like the Shadowrun games (e.g. your old friend is in trouble!), although not generic Chosen One.

A total characterless non-entity or generic player cipher is fine for a pure gameplay-driven game, obviously. A game that does RPG shit like the Witchers yet has a strongly predefined character is just bizarre to me and I get annoyed.

I thought the DA:O origins were a very good idea executed fairly well.

 

[Jrpgfan]

Depends a lot on the pre-made characters and the story. I could never get into The Witcher games because I disliked both the protagonist and the story/setting(found it boring af). In this sense, games with "generic" protagonists are more likely to please me than games with pre-made ones.

 

[sullynathan]

I'm less of a story fag than I was years ago so I will go with generic character that I can shape myself.

 

[Avellion]

Self generated protagonist, is my general preference.

But a few games pull off the whole premade character so well, I could not imagine playing through them as a character I created myself.

 

[dopezilla]

Self generated protagonist, is my general preference.

But a few games pull off the whole premade character so well, I could not imagine playing through them as a character I created myself.

Which games were those, then?

I'm gonna go with a generic character that just sort of gets nudged into the plot through some sort of situation that's been going on involving the player. But then again, I haven't ever played an RPG with a premade character tbh. Kind of on the fence to try the Witcher series, but I'm leaning towards just playing Underrail with a million different characters ad nauseam.

 

[vivec]

This classification is misleading. The player has as much character as the story options provide him. Generic or Premade got nothing to do with it. If you have the option to behave in a certain way then your choices determine what you are, even if you are Geralt. Granted that premade characters come with some liability towards their behavior, but they still are defined by what you do in the game.

 

[circ]

Depends entirely on the game. Ultima's have a mostly premade character in appearance anyway, or they do if you pay attention to the box art and pixels. It all comes down to writing and how involved the writer can make the player.

 

[Lhynn]

You really can't do stuff like that with a blank slate or a more generic character, as those generally require a much broader approach to the overall design.

This is nonsense, the game gives context and background to the player, choices like the one you named are doable and can be just as complex with the right background, just gotta set it up.

 

[Carrion]

This is nonsense, the game gives context and background to the player, choices like the one you named are doable and can be just as complex with the right background, just gotta set it up.

The distinguishing feature about those choices is that they're precisely built to cause a conflict with the player character's values and morals, and forcing those on a blank slate or a generic character is generally a terrible idea. A blank slate can have a wide variety of different motivations, which should be reflected by the game, and setting up such specific scenarios is much more difficult.

 

[Lhynn]

The distinguishing feature about those choices is that they're precisely built to cause a conflict with the player character's values and morals, and forcing those on a blank slate or a generic character is generally a terrible idea. A blank slate can have a wide variety of different motivations, which should be reflected by the game, and setting up such specific scenarios is much more difficult.

Sure, its more difficult, but also more rewarding to the player.

 

[Brutan]

I play or try to play as a neutral evil character ( use the law when it fits my purpose and break it when I can get away and always use the others as expendable pawns)so a premade character dosn't work for me since it's almost always some decent, regular guy. It's hard to join the slavers guild when you're Geralt but there's no problem storywise in Fallout 2.

 

[rhophiehalul78]

I want a little mix of both. Premade characters can be awesome if the story is engaging and the character is likeable.