PC...
Pope Jeremy I, KSC
device and it got me to thinking...
What's the best kind of PC to have?
Personally, I prefer the namless, faceless adventurer, simply because
It allows the player to fully immerse himself or herself into the part
of the PC. My second favorite is the amnesia stricken rube, for a
similar reason. You don't have any back story to remember. The only
relevant things about your PC are things that you learn while actually
playing the game.
I find it jarring to my suspension of disbelif when I have to keep
thinking, "Oh, I can't reach the cabinet because my PC is a midget.",
or "Wait, I should be able to jump the fence because my PC is a
cyborg/monkey.".
Simply put, I find the overall experience of IF to be more convincing
when I can think of the PC as a fictional version of myself, and not
as a puppet that I control.
What do you think?
Pope Jeremy I, KSC
Jonathan Penton
Plant" for example. If I should witness such an elaborate crime in progress,
you better believe I'm going to run away and not look back. And why am I
breaking into this white house?
I'd much rather work with a PC who has some reason and background that would
support the silly things one does in the course of an adventure. If the PC
is developed enough, IF can be much like a role-playing game, without losing
any of its inherent entertainment value.
--
Jonathan Penton
http://www.unlikelystories.org
"Pope Jeremy I, KSC" <popej...@galacticdomination.com> wrote in message
news:e26b718d.01082...@posting.google.com...
L. Ross Raszewski
<popej...@galacticdomination.com> wrote:
>
>What's the best kind of PC to have?
>
>Personally, I prefer the namless, faceless adventurer, simply because
>It allows the player to fully immerse himself or herself into the part
>of the PC. My second favorite is the amnesia stricken rube, for a
>similar reason. You don't have any back story to remember. The only
>relevant things about your PC are things that you learn while actually
>playing the game.
>
>I find it jarring to my suspension of disbelif when I have to keep
>thinking, "Oh, I can't reach the cabinet because my PC is a midget.",
>or "Wait, I should be able to jump the fence because my PC is a
>cyborg/monkey.".
>
>Simply put, I find the overall experience of IF to be more convincing
>when I can think of the PC as a fictional version of myself, and not
>as a puppet that I control.
>
Well, I really don't much care for the AFGNCAAP approach myself. I
tend to connect with characters in IF the same way I connect with
characters in a book. One generally doesn't empathize as well with a
blank protagonist in static fiction as with a well-defined one. Also,
I find that having a PC with traits adds a lot to the game. If you're
going to insist "*YOU* are the PC", you've pretty well restricted what
kind of game it can be if my suspension of disbelief is to remain
intact. I know damned right well that I'm not a cave-explorer from the
land of Frobozz, that I'm not a international spy, and I'm not a
time-traveler at a turn-of-the-century party. And if I'm to be
expected to do all the "adventurer" things -- stealing whatever's not
stapled down, exploring mysterious ruins, and fighting the good fight,
then I'm gong to be stepping out of character the whole time, if the
character I'm allegedly given is "me".
I think it's worth noting that in the traditional Pen-n-Paper RPG, one
generally does not play "himself" -- in fact, a big part of the fun is
the *role*playing, playing a character, rather than being yourself.
See, I can't really cope with the idea of "This is me it's happening
to" -- the sort of stuff that happens in IF doesn't, fr the most part,
happen to me. And, for that matter, I don't move in compass
directions, and I don't percieve the world as text (well, actually,
maybe I do, but that's another thread). For me, it's always more of
"This is a fantasy. I'm pretending to be this protagonist in this
world." And it's easier to pretend to be someone who belongs in this
world, than to pretend that I'm in this world as me, who clearly
doesn't. The more character the PC has to it, the easier it is for me
to imagine myself in his role, because I have a better understanding
of that role in which I'm imagining myself.
Billy Harris
Jeremy I, KSC <popej...@galacticdomination.com> wrote:
> What's the best kind of PC to have?
>
> Personally, I prefer the namless, faceless adventurer, simply because
I'm the opposite, with a caveat. I prefer games for which the
adventurer has a reason for, well, adventuring. I loved Hunter, In
Darkness, but if I were actually in there, I would (1) break several
bones and be incapacitated or if not (2) flee in terror. Similarly, I
liked the rommance in Masquerage even though I'm a man and the PC was
female. The alleged romance in Jigsaw didn't do anything for me.
However, for me to enjoy the game, I have to be able to like the
protagonist. I can see why people loved Ramses, but I hated the game
because I hated the protagonist. This also impacted my [lack of]
enjoyment for Jarod, and some other games which I didn't play enough of
to remember the names of.
Speaking of amnesia, I enjoyed Babel very much. You start out with the
typical "I have amneisa but isn't this a cool station" plot, but your
protagonist DOES have character and past history which you do unravel.
Tom Waddington
> What's the best kind of PC to have?
(...)
> midget.", or "Wait, I should be able to jump the fence because my PC
> is a cyborg/monkey.".
I don't know what my favourite was before, but it's definitely
cyborg/monkeys now.
Be seeing you,
--
Tom Waddington, impressionable
Greg Ewing
>
> I don't know what my favourite was before, but it's definitely
> cyborg/monkeys now.
Now you've done it. There will now be at least
3 games in the competition where the PC is
a cyborg monkey...
--
Greg Ewing, Computer Science Dept, University of Canterbury,
Christchurch, New Zealand
To get my email address, please visit my web page:
http://www.cosc.canterbury.ac.nz/~greg
Knight37
about:
> What's the best kind of PC to have?
I'm pretty fond of the Athlon but the P4 has it's strengths...
oh wait, that's not what you meant, is it?
> Personally, I prefer the namless, faceless adventurer, simply because
> It allows the player to fully immerse himself or herself into the part
> of the PC. My second favorite is the amnesia stricken rube, for a
> similar reason. You don't have any back story to remember. The only
> relevant things about your PC are things that you learn while actually
> playing the game.
Yawn. (sorry, no offense intended, I just find tired and old amnesia thing,
well, tired and old.)
> I find it jarring to my suspension of disbelif when I have to keep
> thinking, "Oh, I can't reach the cabinet because my PC is a midget.",
> or "Wait, I should be able to jump the fence because my PC is a
> cyborg/monkey.".
I like taking on the role of other characters. Of course, I really like
RPG's, and especially pen-and-paper RPG's.
> Simply put, I find the overall experience of IF to be more convincing
> when I can think of the PC as a fictional version of myself, and not
> as a puppet that I control.
> What do you think?
Pretty much the exact opposite.
I like to be told stuff about my character I am taking on the role of in the
game. After all, I *know* it's not me, so I want to know about who it *is*.
However, I feel that a game with the "anonymous" PC is fine, as long as the
other parts of the game hold up to it. Just don't put words in my mouth or
inhibit my actions if I'm not playing a well defined character, because as
the game author, you don't know ME. You know your character, though, and
I'll be happy to play that character as long as it's defined.
--
Knight37
At this point you must just be going for the 2001 Sokwoo Lee award.
-- PBC on csipg.rpg
Jonadab the Unsightly One
> Yawn. (sorry, no offense intended, I just find tired and old amnesia thing,
> well, tired and old.)
I enjoyed Delusions, which used a similar theme. There was also
a work-in-progress that I tested at one point, and I never heard
whether it completed...
but yes, amnesia can only be a useful gimmick in a limited
percentage of games. If they all do it, it quickly gets old.
- jonadab
Heavy Cat Multimedia Ltd.
It is extremely difficult to write a good story without a main character.
If the purpose of the game is to just have a cool environment to explore,
then perhaps having an undefined character will work. However, if the
purpose is to tell a good story at the same time, then it is important to
have a good character too.
--
"Well that's no ordinary rabbit."
Scott
Heavy Cat Multimedia Ltd.
http://www.heavycat.com
http://www.ladystar.net
Tom Waddington
>> I don't know what my favourite was before, but it's definitely
>> cyborg/monkeys now.
> Now you've done it. There will now be at least
> 3 games in the competition where the PC is
> a cyborg monkey...
Hurrah!
;)