next »

[halk3n]

I was thinking about how a lot of games (particularly western games) lack characterization of the mechanics in the game world. This was one of Japan's greatest strengths in their philosophies on game design before they abandoned it for the western market (due the Japanese lacking interest).

One game that made great use out such characterization was Super Mario 64. The camera system has an actual role in the game world! It's interesting because in many ways this helped to suspend the player's belief in the world of Mario.

This little fella...

...gave the transition from 2D Mario to 3D more interesting and believable due to his involvement and reasoning for existing in the game. It's also nice to know that the designers wanted to give a mechanic more meaning rather than making it an ambiguous sterile tool for the player to traverse easily through 3D environments. It also means that you are technically controlling two characters in a game at once! Pretty damn neat if you ask me!

This game has inspired me to come up with my own concept. The soul-cage concept:

A soul-cage is the entity (godhead) that exists in the game world where the characters within are driven by a force that they consider "god" or the "divine spirit". This force is the characterization of the player's involvement in the game world, the soul-cage. It is with this concept that the player's interactivity takes on a different level of meaning compared to the typical ambiguity of the game world ignoring the player's involvement in the story and the characters he/she drives.

In my mind, right now, it's a blue transparent orb that sits within the player's avatar. It is the life force, it is the driving motor, IT is you. This means that the characters might talk about you (the divine spirit) in third-person through the narrative.

So what do you guys think? Does it sound plausible? Would you play a game that would incorporate such a concept?

[SundownKid]

I know that the Baten Kaitos series refers to the player as a "spirit" within the game world, and you even play a major role in the story at some points, so it's a perfect demonstration of how that idea is good. I think it definitely works if the player is some kind of "entity" that is guiding the character and can choose what to say to them.

[halk3n]

Oh wow, I gotta check that game out!

[Sankar]

So what do you guys think? Does it sound plausible? Would you play a game that would incorporate such a concept?

Giving a first impression as game: Probably if someone told me about a game with this idea, I wouldn't be very excited to play it. I would need to see what makes this game unique...
My problem with this idea goes like this:

Wolverine is the only guy in Marvel Comics that doesn't wax his body?
Cause I see no body hair on Scott, Gambit, Professor-X.

Sure, thats an easy one. We're used to not see body hair being drawn. So when they draw wolverine's hairy arms is to show that he has "more hair" than usual. And we're so used to it, that if they started drawing hairy arms on every male character (that shaving doesn't fit their personality of course) we would probably take a little while to adapt to it and in the end it wouldn't contribute to anything if comics were just the same.
Now, it can work if this design decision adds something to Comic. Like for example a X-Men story where everything is gritty, the characters look more realistic with bruises, scars, not everyone has a "barbie body". Scott shaves because he is all sporty, but most of the other guys have normal body hair. Even some of the ladies refuse to shave totally, Storm just dye her little arm hairs.

I hope this little stupid example made sense.
Any idea can work as long as its not just a gimmick. Cause Gimmicks can be cool, but if not used carefully they just add a needless layer of complexity.

But the problem of that "you control a spirit that controls a character" idea, is way more complex than a "grittied up" Comic-Book.


First of all, how much this will influence the Game World?
Lets assume you're a spirit that controls the main character, a tipical swordsman called... Link;
The characters talk about you, okay. But how much the spirit/you controls link?

1) If you have 100% control, then you're like a spirit, that controls his brain, that controls his body. In other words, it doesn't improve things, because all this creates is a separation between you and the main character. You're not "Him", he is just a shell, a meat-puppet for your soul.

2)If you don't have 100% control, then the character acts by himself sometimes and you make some decisions once in a while? This makes me think about those "Interactive Movies" games, where you made some choices, but mostly the character acts by himself.

1.2) If the character is just a puppet for your spirit, then if he dies can you choose another body? If yes, then its a concept that reminds me of Omikron and Messiah. If not, and you "die" if the character dies, then its not any different than what we already have.

2.2) This is the idea that pleases me the most: You're a spirit, one day Link asks for your help. From this day on, you assume control of his life and he can "talk" to you, but his body is yours. And what happens is that you, controlling this guy's life, has a chance to live again... And at the same time, you can make something about his life.
He worries too much, thinks too much as is mostly unable to make decisions cause he is always too worried about the consequences. Since you're a spirit and its not "your life", you can see things with a broader view.
And you're free to do whatever you want with his life. If you want you can try to "act like him" and make things work, or be a "evil spirit" and just have fun with his life.
People don't really know about these "spirits", but you're not the only one. So once in a while you'll see that another person is being controlled by a spirit. You can see a bad spirit destroying someone's life and try to fight it, maybe another spirit has a plan to use "these bodies" to find a way to achieve immortality and "live forever" in these bodies.

Well, I've written too much, but I hope I made myself somewhat clear!

[SundownKid]

Oh wow, I gotta check that game out!

Great! You should play Baten Kaitos Origins, since it's a lot better in terms of gameplay and voice acting. It's a prequel too, so you shouldn't miss anything if you want to play the first.

And you're free to do whatever you want with his life. If you want you can try to "act like him" and make things work, or be a "evil spirit" and just have fun with his life.
People don't really know about these "spirits", but you're not the only one. So once in a while you'll see that another person is being controlled by a spirit.

This idea would make an excellent (and funny) game. I don't remember playing a game where the main character was literally "possessed" by you. Not only would it be a parody of the gamer's control of characters, but the character themselves could have no interest in doing anything you want them to. I'm thinking, an RPG where you are

.

[Destral]

I really like the idea of a game where the protagonist has his own personality but communicates with you as the player when deciding to make decisions, but I'm having some trouble coming up with an explanation of why you still physically control the character's movement etc.

Of course, it's a good way of explaining cut-scenes (the character isn't listening to you at that particular moment, and acting on their own agency).

[Sankar]

I really like the idea of a game where the protagonist has his own personality but communicates with you as the player when deciding to make decisions, but I'm having some trouble coming up with an explanation of why you still physically control the character's movement etc.

I believe that we aren't always looking for a in-depth explanation about how or why something works, if it fits the "rules" set by the story, we'll pretty much accept it.
Of course, when a Game/Movie or Book doesn't suck us in. We just end up looking at the world it creates as if we were aliens on it, trying to fit things to "our" rules and not the "world" rules.

Christopher Nolan for example: He creates these very detailed, scientific-based Worlds and concepts and then he just throws something "unbelievable" and add some quick pseudo-science explanation to it. It works very well and most people I know like his movies.

And the idea of "having a voice inside your head" is pretty natural to us humans, so its easy to accept this concept in a fantasy world. And the idea of soul and mind is part of our culture. So taking control over someone's body while keeping this person "soul" being able to communicate with you, is something that we can accept. Actually, it can even be something that we WISH was true.

And if you're more into a modern-day, non-fantasy explanation. You can just play the "Maybe he is Crazy" card, that seens very popular these days...

[SirNiko]

I really like the idea of a game where the protagonist has his own personality but communicates with you as the player when deciding to make decisions, but I'm having some trouble coming up with an explanation of why you still physically control the character's movement etc.

The player is never controlling the character directly, you're giving him guidance and it just happens that his movements correspond to your button presses.

He COULD choose not to jump when you push A, but he happens to agree with you. And if you wind up making him fall in a pit, it's YOUR fault for telling him to jump too early / late.

[SundownKid]

I really like the idea of a game where the protagonist has his own personality but communicates with you as the player when deciding to make decisions, but I'm having some trouble coming up with an explanation of why you still physically control the character's movement etc.

Technically, that would still be ludo-narrative dissonance since the character is supposedly acting on their own and you are just a "spirit guide" of sorts. No one would literally mirror every move you tell them to, even if you did have some sort of "power of suggestion". It's basically explained away by suspension of disbelief in the same way that game "menus" don't make sense in real life. Even if you did explain it in the context of the universe, it would still not make sense how you can save, pause, reload, etc.

[iffi]

I really like the idea of a game where the protagonist has his own personality but communicates with you as the player when deciding to make decisions, but I'm having some trouble coming up with an explanation of why you still physically control the character's movement etc.

Of course, it's a good way of explaining cut-scenes (the character isn't listening to you at that particular moment, and acting on their own agency).

Point and click adventure games can work like this quite naturally, especially if they're fond of breaking the fourth wall like the Monkey Island games are, since all you're really doing is just giving the player character pointers or suggestions of what to do. I remember that the protagonist, Guybrush Threepwood, in The Curse of Monkey Island often made comments to the player and refused to do things that would get himself killed.

[Wilson Saunders]

This soul cage concept is a nice way to justify multiple lives in a video game. As in "Remember that time you died? Well that still happened in this continuity, you are now inhabiting the body of a clone/very similar person." However we didn't love Mario64 for the camera man character, so we are not going to think a game with this concept is brilliant because of a glowy ball that flies next to the player.

You should consider what game dynamics you can implement by having the player's representation exist outside the main avatar. For example can you take direct control over friendly or enemy characters? Do you control friendly characters like a RTS? If your main character dies can you continue the playing as a different character? How does the enemy challenge an immortal god being? What limitations do you have as a spirit?

There was a game called "Messiah" that implemented a concept similar to this. If you have not looked at it yet, you may want to check it out.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Messiah_(video_game)

[leonelc29]

maybe i don't really understand what your concept mean, or i do understand it.

i do think that your concept are plausible, as you maybe the navigator in somekind of rpg/rts game. you navigate the character(one, maybe), and guide him/her through the world, or dungeon or something. he/she may follow your lead if s/he trust you, or just ignore your order if s/he disbelieve you. you are given a bunch of dialogue to tell the main character to trust you in the stuff you ask him/her to do. this is kinda different with rts and rpg as the character may disobey your guide.

by the way, this remind me of Black & White...

[halk3n]

I love all the responses guys, thanks a bunch! I think I should've posted this topic in the Writing section as my stance was more concerned with characterizing mechanics rather than the functionality of said mechanics. Meaning that my original concept (whilst vague on it's selling point) is inherently important on the narrative to justify - and more importantly - convince the player that such things are believable and interesting in such a way that they'd be genuinely interested in pursuing the game further.

With this concept, I believe that narrative can be dissected into multiple dimensions woven through the game's fabric of play and tell.