Difference between revisions of "Characters"

Revision as of 11:12, 17 September 2010

The abstract characteristics of deigetic persons.

Note: The use of character here is in the meaning of the characteristics of a person rather than the traditional use in art of the representation of a person (Agents is used instead form the traditional use). Also, for this context anything one would be likely to take an intentional stance^[1] towards, or perceive that one is intended to take such a stance, is considered a person.

Some games have this pattern without having Avatars (and when both exist it is common to refer to either aspect as the character). Most table-top roleplaying games (such as GURPS and earlier editions of Dungeons and Dragons) support use of Avatars in combat situations but make it optional, while the computer game Alter Ego keep track of Attributes for the player but doesn't present the player's Character in a Game World.

When players have a Freedom of Choice regarding which New Abilities to acquire, the resulting Customizable Development can provide a game system acknowledgment of Player Time Investments that can support Emotional Attachment to the Characters.

Roleplaying Randomness Agents Avatars Units Non-Player Characters Freedom of Choice Multiplayer Games Factions

Actions Have Diegetically Social Consequences

Character Defining Actions

Detective Structure

Enforced Agent Behavior

Internal Conflicts

Internal Rivalry

Many games let players control game elements that represent people or creatures that act in the Game World. When these people or creatures have characteristics not directly shown in the Game World that can change during gameplay, these game elements have an abstract element called Character.

Roleplaying

Health bar (pattern?)

Examples

Tabletop roleplaying games such as Dungeons & Dragons and GURPS let each player control their own Character, and one of the main types of goal in the games is to raise the character's level, stats, or skills. This has been carried over to computer-based version of roleplaying games such as the Elder Scrolls series and the Fallout series, and games building on the genre, e.g. the Diablo series, the Mass Effect series, Torchlight and World of Warcraft. The X-Com series and Jagged Alliance series lets a player control several Characters at once.

Many action-oriented computer games can be said to have an extremely weak form of the pattern through having just one abstract value, typically a health value. Examples of games that fall in this category include the Doom series, the Super Mario series and the The Legend of Zelda series (and they typically also have some inventories for weapons or tools). An exception to this can be found in the team-based FPS Return to Castle Wolfenstein: Enemy Territory, where players have Characters that can develop between levels by gaining experience points in various skills.

Using the pattern

The design of use of Characters in games can either be on the level of creating explicit characters or by creating rules for how players can create their own Characters. Independent of how Characters are created, the game designer can choose whether Character Development should be possible and if players should be able to affect it. Allowing players control over Character Development increases Freedom of Choice as well as creates Planned Character Development, which is a form of Investment. This planning offers players the chance of Varied Gameplay by making use of New Abilities to instantiate potential Orthogonal Unit Differentiation. Planned Character Development gives the possibility for Team Development in games with Team Play. However, unless games make use of Game Masters, this kind of Freedom of Choice regarding Characters may be difficult to combine with Narrative Structures.

Creating complete Characters lets them fit within an Alternative Reality and allows personalized and unique Avatars for each Character. In games with Combat or Overcome goals between the players, pre-created Characters can be extensively play-tested to ensure Player Balance. The use of pre-created Characters is common in games either where Character Development is not a large part of gameplay or where the Character, and any Character Development, is closely tied to a tightly controlled Narrative Structure.

Typical ways of letting players create Characters are based around Randomness or Budgeted Action Points. These are in turn used to determine the many various characteristics possible: the Handle that identifies the character to other players; number values that represent physical or mental abilities or status of measurements such as Lives, health, and fatigue; Skills that affect the likelihood of succeeding with actions and may give Privileged Abilities such as being a Producer that can create Renewable Resources; advantages, disadvantages, quirks, or other ways of describing character traits and motivating initial Decreased Abilities, Improved Abilities, or Privileged Abilities; worldly possessions and equipment that represents Resources or Tools; and occupations, social statuses, and social networks that define the characters place in the Game World. In games with Avatars, some of these characteristics are usually cosmetic. The variety of values associated with Characters then open up for the range of Rewards, such as Improved Abilities through raised Skills, and Penalties, such as Decreased Abilities through received Damage, that can occur during gameplay.

When players have rules for creating Characters, this gives them Freedom of Choice and Creative Control depending on the level of Randomness involved in the process, but this increases the possibilities for Identification and Immersion through Emotional Immersion in all cases. The personalization possible also allows players to construct Player Defined Goals for their Characters as they are created, and can give them the Illusion of Influence over how the Narrative Structure will develop. However, with a larger amount of Freedom of Choice regarding the character creation process, the problem of fitting or adjusting the character to an integral role in a Narrative Structure increases also. This problem can be mitigated by the presence of Dedicated Game Facilitators that can perform Negotiation to make the Character suitable to the planned events in the game or modify the Narrative Structure to fit the Character.

A critical choice regarding Characters is if the game design should try to make character traits presented diegetically in the Game World. Although there may seem to be no obvious reason why to not do so it, the Freedom of Choice for players may be limited. This not only since Character presentation is typically done through Cut Scenes (but see Environmental Storytelling) which automatically restricts players Freedom of Choice to perform actions at certain times (and gives Downtime). The presentation done by the design also limits how players can shape the Characters through Roleplaying since it puts restrictions in which direction the Characters' storyline can develop, at least as long as the players do not wish to break the Diegetic Consistency of the game session.

Diegetic Aspects

The Characters pattern does not need to be combined with any pre-defined ways of presenting people diegetically. Tabletop and live action Roleplaying games can let players express their Characters through Performance using only their own voice and body.

When diegetic presentations are created for Characters, Avatars are the most common form although some games (e.g. the X-Com series and the Jagged Alliance series) make use of Units.

Interface Aspects

Narrative Aspects

Consequences

In games with Game Worlds, Characters form links between abstract game state values and concrete game state values through their connection to Avatars or Units. When no concrete Game World exists, Characters take the role of Focus Loci in replacement of Avatars.

Characters provide games with points for Identification and through these points Emotional Attachment, especially in cases where Roleplaying the Characters or Storytelling about the Characters is possible. This can strengthen the impact of, and widen the range of, Penalties usable in the game, especially in the case of Persistent Game Worlds or when Planned Character Development exists. The presence of Characters also allows more detailed Enemies and richer Narration Structures where social relationships can be important components. When both player Characters and their Enemies are given abstract characteristics this can lead to Experimenting by the players to understand their relations.

In Multiplayer Games, having Characters with different Privileged Abilities allows Orthogonal Unit Differentiation and lets players perform Team Combos. This also allows players to specialize in different [[Competence Areas] and try to succeed in Team Strategy Identification. However, the differences in abilities may cause Player Balance to be disrupted.

Relations

Can Instantiate

with ...

Can Modulate

Can Be Instantiated By

Can Be Modulated By

Possible Closure Effects

Potentially Conflicting With

History

An updated version of the pattern Characters that was part of the original collection in the book Patterns in Game Design^[2].

Acknowledgments

Maltto Elsolainen, Markus Montola, Jaakko Stenros, Anders Warrby

References

1. ↑ Daniel C. Dennett (1996), The Intentional Stance (6th printing), Cambridge, Massachusetts: The MIT Press, ISBN 0-262-54053-3 (First published 1987).
2. ↑ Björk, S. & Holopainen, J. (2004) Patterns in Game Design. Charles River Media. ISBN1-58450-354-8.