So this is more of an analysis post on media I like because I want to ramble but I don't have interest in throwing it on social media lol. I recently have been playing Guild Wars 2 after an 8 year hiatus from it, and really enjoying myself. But I had forgotten how the player (here on out named Commander) gets a voice! This is something in make-your-own-character RPGs I always love BUT have always had lots of thoughts on how its done, and when its done well or how it fails.
SO for just this blog I feel like breaking down different "types" of RPG player characters, and how they tend to be tackled and where they can work or not work. Do note! I am listing some very general "types" and this won't capture all the more nuanced takes.

Type 1a: Silent, blank slate. This one is silent but they will have some sort of dialog choices in text that just aren't spoken. A very common choice in RPGs where you still get the process of a character creator, class, maybe basic background. But otherwise no voice for dialog. Something like Skyrim of Baldurs Gate 3. Usually the writing for the dialog will remain pretty safe, and not overly defining of a character. So even then, its not hard to project into them, minus the fact they're likely speaking as a "good guy", since thats what the protagonist is likely doing.

Type 1b: Silent, and completely silent, at that. All of the above minus dialog choice. Think of something like Pokemon or some Dragon Quest games. Your character doesn't say a thing, and that plays it very safe in not risking conflicting feelings from your player on whether or not they like or agree with the character's "voice".

Type 2: Completely developed outside of the player, a full "voice" in some form (voice acted or not), and you are just the means in which they are controlled and make choices in the present. Yes, depending on the extreme of it, you may argue there is a point where its not an RPG, so to be clear this must still be in a game where dialog trees and choices are made by the player. Its just that you have a Whole Guy and not something you made through character creation- no class, no tweaks, no background to pick. You will make unique choices during the story but you may not feel 100% like them as you would with one of the previously mentioned RPGs. You could look at something like Disco Elysium, or if you wish to stretch the definition a bit you can look at Peniment.

This type of Player can be very well done but you go into it knowing the player doesn't need to "be" them in the same way. The player should know right off the bat "Oh, I'm playing as a man named Harry, who's a drunk divorced addict cop", and they know that is what they are playing and what will be written for them. Not "I'm playing as my own character I made, designed, and pick the background for. Which means its whoever I want it to be!", which leads to many expectations of who they are going to be through the writing of the game. Which leads into the longer discussion of my next type.

Type3: The custom character who gets a voice. The key thing from the last type is that its like your typical RPG, you just have voice acting. This one doesn't pop up all too much, and I think for a few reasons. 1) RPGs are long so, I think voicing all that dialog is often a reason it doesn't happen lol. 2) It gives a new struggle on trying to make sure the character is written well, but neutrally enough for players to still insert themselves like in the type 1's. Because a voice does A LOT to redefined who that character is. Suddenly, you are no longer imagining your own voice of them in your head. Now someone else, a whole other voice actor- a person, is doing that for you. Did you think they'd down like that? Express like that? Does it fit, to you? I think this makes some people detach from them due to it, and that can be good or bad. It can be very bad if the player suddenly doesn't see themself in the character while thinking the writing is bad.

See, the struggles here are writing in a way so players think well written. But also writing them neutrally enough so they can appeal to everyone and their blank slate OC. But also also, writing enough unique personality choices for them that the RPG has good dialog choice. ALSO make sure the dialog in between all that still doesn't define a personality so strongly that is doesn't fit those choices/causes continuity issues. Right. Thats a lot. Games that fall in this category would be the very well known Dragon Age series, and more recent reminder for me being Guild Wars 2.

DA is very known for this, and there are many conflicting opinions on each protagonist. Though I have seen more conflict and criticism to the Inquisitor and Rook. And having played both, it certainly brought many thoughts to where it works and where it doesn't. And with GW2 being an example of this same thing from a different franchise, I felt the need to look at them both. Where did they go well? Where did they go wrong?

DAV is a recent example with Rook, and I can admit I found Rook to maybe be the most lacking of all DA player characters. They give a good selection of background choices, and they plop you into a world where all these factions can be interacted with. One one hand, it was cool having some unique dialog with one of the companions due to it. But in the larger scheme of things it was hardly relevant. In general I think that game struggled to keep the factions involved enough to make them feel impactful anyways, but I digress... Rook is a very very "safe" character, more than the previous DA characters I think. There is a lot of good in the character creation process that still ends up with a basic Hero type, and Rook is really incapable of being mean at all. Truly, the teasing snarky attitude does nothing when you return to non-choice dialog and its all the regular nice guy behaviors. Even if the Inquisitor struggled with that in ways too, they at least felt more grounded in their highly regarded, assertive leadership role.
This series needs to balance that appeal to everyone, while making sure your character still fits in the story, with attempts to give them personality. But the safer they play it, the less of an interesting character you get. Look back to DA2's Hawke. They were much more established as a person (having a family present, a normal/not role based name for the first time, etc) and I know are regarded as one of the best DA protagonists. Hawke had a pretty solid personality through the dialog wheel, choices that were meant to drive home the type of person they are. While they were more exaggerated between each of the three personalities (going from a nice one to a mean one is possible, but could feel pretty jarring with some choices) it gave more depth to what you could sound like. Still, not everyone will be satisfied... what if you wanted to choice a purple option, but it seemed too mean? But the red is too, but blue is too nice? That's imo where you end up, with Rook playing it safe.

Interestingly, BG3 was intended to have some voice acting, and if I recall, it was taken out in early access due to people not wanting it. People complained about it, how it made them feel in terms of character control and relatability. Though, BG3 fans in EA were very... very vocal about the concept and feelings of player control and agency, maybe more so than others (and it was still a huge argument, with scenes like Haarlep's later on). And that will always be a struggle with this situation. But, I don't think its impossible to go and write an RPG protagonist with a voice who ya know... remains entertaining, and well written.

Which brings me to the only other title I have notably played with a voiced protagonist. GW2 has the Commander. GW2 has one of the much more interesting creator creations especially for an MMO. You have races that all have unique voices, pretty detailed edits to the body that most MMOs don't provide, and unique traits to pick that define their personal story going forward (which is unique to each race too). it has been some time since I actually played the personal story but I played the two earliest expansions (PoF and HoT) along with LW 1-2, 4-5. The game provides voiced segments in world or cutscenes that may not always provide choices, alongside unvoiced choices with text only. Regardless, the choices you make are often defining to the story/mission (chose which person to save first, pick who comes with you, etc). GW2 likes to bring a bit of humor into its writing at times, not in a distracting way but in a way that intentionally brings snark or sarcasm to the Commander. I think humor can be a decent way to support the voice and writing if its done well without detracting from how they act away from it and if its not done too much it isn't a problem usually. Ultimately this will be subjective but, GW2 puts this vibe of writing into it pretty quickly so you should be able to judge for yourself if that writing overall is your thing at all. Past that, the Commander by PoF is assertive but brash in their leadership role. They get anxious and panic, they're put into actually stressful positions that show how they'd behave and its not always easy. They are literally quite commanding in their position in a way that doesn't feel like its being too soft or nice to their team mates which is especially important when they're literally in charge of massive armies.

The Commander's writing to me is sensible, but plays it in a way that doesn't try to direct a personality too hard to where they can't be your own person. What's most notable to me is how they are as a leader versus Rook. Rook is too nice of a leader, they're too soft, they're never strict, we never see them break, etc. This in turn also made the stakes feel not as intense because it seemed so easy for them, especially with the game focusing so hard on companion's personal issues and not always the threat at hand as well. I did not see Rook get put into panic inducing, anxiety filled scenarios. When Rook was close to death it had little impact on how they spoke or were written. There is a point where playing it safe means no personality at all, and that kind of ends up being the case for them.

GW2 definitely has its flaws in writing (though in my opinion thats more on general plot writing) as much as DA has its own, and ultimately the opinion of a well done speaking RPG character. But it had been quite a while since I ran into one other than DA, and I actually felt some spark of interest with the Commander over Rook. I think its hard writing this kind of thing, and it certainly has had me think over this type of game many times before. While I have no plans to make a game akin to DA or GW2 in writing, thinking about how players relate to characters they play as for many reasons gives a lot of thought of writing video games at all. Even if its not an RPG, people will in my opinion always have a more personal connection to a character they play as versus a character they purely watch in a movie or show. You are technically always making choices for the character, even outside of an RPG genre, but RPGs intend for you to insert or project yourself into the character far more than other games. If you are writing with that intention you are now actively thinking about how people will feel about the personality they witness. You have to think, what can most people relate to? And depending on where you go with that, you can end up with a lacking, boring, or too safe character that people find to blank or uninteresting to care about at all.

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

EMAIL