Are We What We Play?

[GameBanshee News]

1UP has published an essayist editorial that poses the question, "Are we what we play"?

On the other hand, I have played plenty of other games in which I most certainly have felt a certain identification with the character I was playing. Not surprisingly, this mostly tends to occur in role-playing games, especially (but not limited to) the kind in which I'm creating my own character from scratch. It's no coincidence that, given the option, I name my character the same name no matter what game I'm playing. I've been the same guy through 20+ years of gaming, regardless of genre. And that same guy has one constant trait: he can't be bad. If we're talking D&D, I'm always Lawful Good. I can't not be. Maybe it's my upbringing, maybe it's overcompensation for mistakes I've made in real life -- who knows. I just know that I actually feel uncomfortable with the notion even of being "chaotically good." Given the choice, I want my in-game character to do the right thing, always. My default class, given the choice? Paladin. The few times I've actually dabbled in making the "bad" or "wrong" choice, I always feel terrible about it and need to reload the game to an earlier save. The "choice" in BioShock was no choice at all to me: not saving the little sisters was too horrific for me to even consider.

It's indeed not a real choice, but not for the reasons you name, Mr. Green.

Spotted on RPGCodex.

[galraen]

Originally Posted by GameBanshee News

Given the choice, I want my in-game character to do the right thing, always. My default class, given the choice? Paladin.

And yet, Paladins often have to choose between what's lawful and what's good!

I have some things in common with Jeff Green, namely I have one character that has been through every game I've played. His name is Morel, if possible he's always a Drow Elf, and he's (again when possible) a variant of a Fioghter/Mage/Thief. In KOTOR, he was a Rogue/Consular, but one constant, even if other things have to be sacrificed, is he always has to be Neutral Good, stated where applicable, but always defined by his actions. Of course what defines good is very much down to personal opinion, but the character must always seek to do the most good, irrespective of laws or individual freedom. One thing my friends have learned over the years, is that if they fiond me playing a game, and the character I'm playing is Morel, this is the definitive run through, and always my first complete run through, come hell or high water.

However, unlike Mr Green I always (if the game's worth playing more than once) play other characters, neutral/evil, male/female, and every race available if the game really does beg for multiple run throughs.

Whilst Morel represents my own persona in many ways, role-playing him is very easy, I just act naturally so to speak. The real challenge when role-playing is when the character you're playing is completely different from you. That's an aspect of role-playing that Jeff Green completely misses, and it's his loss IMO.

[Ergopad]

I too use the same name with every game. It's been a decade now the same, since I choose it from a mousepad when I had to came up a name for a online game.

My choice for the "class" on the other hand isn't that specific, but I always tend to be Neutral- or Chaotic Good. I usually tend to choose melee fighters, but it all depends, from thief to cleric, but most of the time Paladin, it feels like a nice mix of things. But I never choose Mage, even though I think it's very interesting class, I avoid it. My friend once said, when we talked about "classes in real life", that I'm like a paladin always giving orders and guiding people, even too much.

Here's what I'm (in the game )

Name: Ergopad (Ergonpandilus or Ergon Pan'Dilus, it depends how long it can be and does it have surname)
Alignment: Lawful (Neutral/Chaotic) good
Race: Human (Half-...)
Class: Paladin (Ranger/Thief/...)
Weapons: Greatsword (or two big dual weapons)
Armors: Depends on the class, but usually medium
Colors: Red + Black clothes
Appearence: Blond, beardy (if possible), stocky and quite tall
Pet: some big beast (a bear?)

[Siberys]

"are we what we play?"

Yes, because I've always looked at myself and thought I'm the greatest 20th level fire-wizard that ever lived.

[fullautomatic55]

Originally Posted by galraen

The real challenge when role-playing is when the character you're playing is completely different from you. That's an aspect of role-playing that Jeff Green completely misses, and it's his loss IMO.

I agree. While it is fun to play a game just as I would normally act, it is (to me) more satisfying and more fun to play a game where I can act in ways that I would never dream of in real life. The merchant swindled me? I'll just have to beat him to a pulp and get that money back! Now instead of facing fines and jailtime, I can just take my money back and walk away.

[Brother None]

Originally Posted by galraen

Whilst Morel represents my own persona in many ways, role-playing him is very easy, I just act naturally so to speak. The real challenge when role-playing is when the character you're playing is completely different from you. That's an aspect of role-playing that Jeff Green completely misses, and it's his loss IMO.

A part of the whole immersion-nonsense? You are your character-isms.

In pen and paper and cRPGs, I always try to create a "Vasilii". Vasilii started as a "schelme" in DSA, schelme being a type of half-insane magic types, normal humans raised by kobolds (kobolds being natural magic creature). Vasilii's unpredictable "chaotic neutral" attitude doesn't really fit my personality all that much.

But I always mix. Hell, in good RPGs, the variety of characters and the way the game reacts to them is a definite plus. I've played Arcanum as a gnome specialized in throwing weapons and illusion magic with his own morality, who would only wear a nice suit and top hat (indeed, Vasilii), a dumb half-ogre warrior of the good kind, a dwarf technophile who was more pragmatic, an evil pure sorceress type, etc. etc.

[DesR85]

Isn't this article kind of pointless? They're just games for crying out loud.

[BlueSky]

Yes , I'm a dark elf, pyramid building, Mario bashing, spacer running around Liberty City in my low-rider, shooting Locusts and carrying out assassinations while stacking my Tetris blocks and playing Blackjack, resting outside of Baldur's Gate before I put on my Jedi robe.

[Siberys]

Originally Posted by BlueSky

Yes , I'm a dark elf, pyramid building, Mario bashing, spacer running around Liberty City in my low-rider, shooting Locusts and carrying out assassinations while stacking my Tetris blocks and playing Blackjack, resting outside of Baldur's Gate before I put on my Jedi robe.

Hehe, don't forget your pet. Ya know, the one that's a little yellow circle and eats dots and fruits while being chased by ghosts?

[VonDondu]

I think it's a good question. (It doesn't hurt to ask these things when people spend so much of their lives playing games.) But I think the answer is almost always "no".

The closest I've come to being "myself" in a game is when I've played first person shooters that lacked any sort of character development (other than being able to increase your power by acquiring better armor and better weapons). "Who is this Space Marine I'm supposed to be playing?" Who knows, and who cares? I'm just trying to survive and kill as many monsters as I can and win the game. And do it with style, of course.

My transition to RPGs (Baldur's Gate, Icewind Dale, Torment, etc.) was hampered by my preference for games in which you don't need to "develop" your character and all you need is more firepower. But once I got the hang of roleplaying, the whole point in playing was to create a character in the RPG world, not to be myself the way I am in the real world. Certainly, my in-game choices and preferences reflect who I really am IF I play a character who is like myself. But if I play a character who isn't like me, then it's like writing a story about a fictional character--and I don't think it's true that every character we create is simply an extension of ourselves. If that were true, then fiction would be a lot less...fictional.

Has Jeff Green ever done any sort of literary criticism? Does he have any background in philosophy or psychology? Or is he just a guy who reviews games?

[dragon wench]

Originally Posted by DesR85

Isn't this article kind of pointless? They're just games for crying out loud.

I don't think it is pointless at all, it's an interesting question and it has certainly been discussed in some of our forums over the years. I can't really see becoming the character you play in something like a first person shooter as much, just because of the nature of such games.
But, Role Playing games can lend themselves to this type of identification, I think.

For me, personally, the characters I play almost always resemble who I am in RL. For example, if I play a D&D based game, I cannot bring myself to play either "Evil" or "Lawful Good." Invariably, I end up as either "Neutral Good" or "Chaotic Good," or sometimes "Chaotic Neutral."

What I find interesting is that it seems easier to actually "roleplay," though, when you pick a non humanoid character. One of my favourite game characters ever created was actually an Argonian in Morrowind. There was something vaguely liberating about not playing a human or elf, because I did not identify in quite the same way.

I have even noticed something similar playing LOTRO. I have a two elven characters and a hobbit. Both elves are, to a point, reflections of certain aspects of my RL personality.
The hobbit, on the other hand, is very different... For instance, she's the ever, irrepressibly bubbly and cheerful type... Something I most definitely am not

[DesR85]

Well, aside from being slightly influenced by playing one too many WWII games, there is no connection between myself and the characters of other games. I did play RPGs, as a male character and always focus on the good side, yet I see no connection between him and me. The same can be said of set characters like Christopher Stone, Max Payne, Geralt of Rivia, Cloud Strife, etc.

So, the answer to the question is still a no with a capital 'N'. That's why they're just games. I enjoy playing them, sometimes I do get drawn into some of them, but that's as far as it goes.