[EasilyConfused]

Another thought provoking article Ben . . .

I haven't played all the games you mentioned, so I wasn't sure how irritating the Gobliiins (did I get that right?) main character really was. An interesting insight about the remarkable number of amnesiacs in games . . . or people with just . . . no history. (KOTOR, Trep?!?!?!?!) Also, the dork/underdog point was well-taken.

At the same time it seems to me that any individual's reaction to a character is . . . individual. A look at the massive amount written about the world's greatest literature will show that people are divided in their opinions about even the most memorable characters of our collective imagination . . . or take that famous (and to me hilarious) discussion about Humphrey Bogart and Ingrid Bergman in Casablanca that Harry and Sally have in "When Harry Met Sally." (Should she get on the plane or not?)

An AG example: April Ryan. She annoyed the bejeesus out of me at the beginning of the game, with her smart-mouth attitude, and then grew up a bit, but still was a little too snotty for my taste. Another AG example (uh, these seem to be the only two AG examples I ever discuss): Kate Walker. The whole romance thread in that game has been debated a lot, and most people saw it as a technical problem--"they shouldn't have had the cell phone, it interrupted the game." To me, the problem wasn't the cell phone, and it wasn't that the cell phone was or wasn't necessar to show her "inner self"--she could have been talking to people around her (or Oscar.) The problem was that the conversations she was having with the people back home--or maybe just the people back home themselves--were so inane, you just didn't want to have to listen to them at all.

So, I guess I'm suggesting that perhaps in part whether one is playing the fool or not is in the eye of the beholder. But I agree that this assumes that the designer has already put in a good amount of effort to make the character real, intriguing, and interesting, and not just some cardboard cutout that does dumb things "just for yuks". 8-) 8-)

[Ninth]

Originally Posted by EasilyConfused

I haven't played all the games you mentioned, so I wasn't sure how irritating the Gobliiins (did I get that right?) main character really was.

You have no idea... Yatzee example revived some atrocious memories of this stupid game.
There were three characters in Gobliiins, 2 in Gobliins (the sequel) and 1 in Goblins (the 3rd part). The less "i"s, the less irritating the characters get.
Goblins is an excellent game, really, albeit extremely hard, and the main character is rather cool, in a catastrophic kind of way.

[Jazhara7]

I remember when I started playing "The Black Mirror". Samuel was such a snob (not totally, but he ordered some people around, like a snob - I think the biggest problem was the following (minor plot detail, which is actually also revealed in that introduction comic that was released on the website)

Spoiler:

The whole thing with him and his dead girlfriend (or were they already married?), and how he never forgives himself that. He has such an annoying tone while looking at the picture, and it drips with self-sorrow.

). At first I thought I will never like this character. But after some time I grew to like even that character.

The Gobliiins thing was really annoying. I never really played through that whole game without jumping to the new rooms. I think that fear bar was a bad idea. I mean, what purpose did it actually serve, apart from frustrating the player?

I personally preferred Goblins III (yes, 1 "i"). But I also liked Gobliins II (and again: yes, 2 "i"). I sadly could never finish it completely, due to some weird bug with my game. But I think I got to the very last scene of the game.


-

[Kolorabi]

The article was quite good, and I agree with most of what it said. Just one thing, though, I'm pretty sure that the main character in Beneath a Steel Sky isn't a "real" amnesiac. He came to the Gap when he was just a child, so it isn't really strange that he doesn't remember his mother & father. He doesn't forget his life in the Gap when he's captured and the game starts. He just never really say much about it.

[EasilyConfused]

Originally Posted by Jazhara7

I remember when I started playing "The Black Mirror". Samuel was such a snob (not totally, but he ordered some people around, like a snob - I think the biggest problem was the following (minor plot detail, which is actually also revealed in that introduction comic that was released on the website)

Oh, that's a good example. I hated that game. But for me it was the TERRIBLE voice acting, which a lot of people have commented on--was this also true in German (or did you play in English? ) He sounded so wooden and boring . . . a-n-d h-e t-a-l-k-e-d s-o s-l-o-w-l-y i-t w-a-s v-e-r-y f-r-u-s-t-r-a-t-i-n-g.

[Jazhara7]

Originally Posted by EasilyConfused

Oh, that's a good example. I hated that game. But for me it was the TERRIBLE voice acting, which a lot of people have commented on--was this also true in German (or did you play in English? ) He sounded so wooden and boring . . . a-n-d h-e t-a-l-k-e-d s-o s-l-o-w-l-y i-t w-a-s v-e-r-y f-r-u-s-t-r-a-t-i-n-g.

I played the german version. The german version had excellent voice acting. I really enjoyed the game, and it is actually one of my favourites, despite the sappy bits at the start.


-

[Yahtzee]

Originally Posted by EasilyConfused

At the same time it seems to me that any individual's reaction to a character is . . . individual.
...
So, I guess I'm suggesting that perhaps in part whether one is playing the fool or not is in the eye of the beholder.

I agree. As I said in the article, 'cool means different things from person to person'. But my theory on this subject is that anyone's perceived image of coolness becomes annoying when taken too far. For instance, you might think a bloke wearing an eyepatch is cool, but if you then add a second eyepatch, suddenly it's just stupid.

[EasilyConfused]

Originally Posted by Yahtzee

I agree. As I said in the article, 'cool means different things from person to person'. But my theory on this subject is that anyone's perceived image of coolness becomes annoying when taken too far. For instance, you might think a bloke wearing an eyepatch is cool, but if you then add a second eyepatch, suddenly it's just stupid.

Ah. Indeed. That's when character turns into caricature . . .

<Goes off to die laughing at own little pretentious witticism . . . >

[stepurhan]

Have to agree that Kent from Normality. Despite liking the game story I found Kent so irritating that I wanted to get to the end, just so I could stop being him. In my long history of playing adventure games, he is the only PC that has made me sell the game as soon as I finished playing it. I just could never imagine wanting to play him (and hence the game) again.

But Guybrush the amiable idiot and Gabriel Knight the lech with the ambiguous morals. Both a joy to replay.

[BoyToy]

Great article, I loved it!
Not only can I relate to a lot of what's being said - but even when I can't, it is still absolutely entertaining to read.

[Jake]

Originally Posted by Yahtzee

For instance, you might think a bloke wearing an eyepatch is cool, but if you then add a second eyepatch, suddenly it's just stupid.

second eyepatch not pictured, but it does exist

[Erwin_Br]

Two eyepatches could also be lazyness. I'm pointing at developers who just mirror their character sprites, instead of creating different ones facing left and right.

--Erwin

[Jazhara7]

Originally Posted by Erwin_Br

Two eyepatches could also be lazyness. I'm pointing at developers who just mirror their character sprites, instead of creating different ones facing left and right.

--Erwin

Not if they are careful that always the same eyepatch overlaps.


-

[Leonardi]

Yesterday I finished Runaway: A Road Adventure and after reading the article today I immediatly thought of Brian, the protagonist for that game. He is such a wuss and refuses to do so many things and yet decides to do others that by the end of the game I hated his guts.