What kind of PC (playable character) do you prefer?

[Rauter]

What kind of PC (playable character) do you prefer?

I mean, do you prefer:
1) character with predefined personality, look, story background and ambitions
OR
2) character you can customize as you wish, give him your own personality...?

In my opinion well-writen character is far more better for story purpose than some generic one. You have (if it's done right) a feeling protagonist is part of the world, has his/her place there and do things because (s)he has some reason to do it, not because game told him/her so.
I didn't have such feelings when I played as Commander Shepard or Hero of Neverwinter (protagonists from Dragon Age are somehow mix of both types, but it might work better if dialogues were better writen. ).

 

[Blothulfur]

Torment, Witcher, Betrayal at Krondor and all the later Ultima's all had you playing as a pre-defined protagonist, so I voted for that but I do think that Dragon Age was onto a good thing with the Origin's, before they jumped ship and went full retard. Obviously there was too little content for each origin, what with Sten asking my Orzammar born and bred Dwarf about humans and magic as if he'd fucking know or care, but the idea was good and I think could do with expanding upon.

The strange thing about the above pre-defined protagonists to my thinking is they get a lot more choice and a damn lot more personality shown than the fully customisable characters, who are often just so easily replacable in a game that really they don't matter. You can play as your self made massively detailed character in Skyrim, but the game will never acknowledge any of your choices or treat you as anything but an errand boy, even when you kill a Dragon God. Shepard was kind of in the middle for me but suffered from their usual crap writing, infantile plots and lack of any significant choice in his own actions thus making him Bioware's not mine.

I'm hopeful for better, perhaps in Eternity or Numenera?

 

[soldiergeralt]

yep, pre defined characters have much more realistic dialog, since you don't have to write for some blank slate hermaphrodite.

 

[Aditya]

as much as I like the second, the former cannot be beaten for most cases

 

[wichat]

Third option:
I don't care if the game is GOOD

 

[Luxorek]

Hard to say really.

On one hand, I really like to have a character that looks somewhat like me, whom I can customize in background and abilities. On the other, I know that predefined PCs are usually better written, better integrated into the plot and the world, not to mention that they usually look sooo much better than anything you can "make" yourself in CC. I guess, I lean towards predefined characters more.

And I agree with Wichat. If the game is good, I will play it anyway - I won't stay away if it doesn't have CC or something.

It's actually interesting to see that here on The Witcher forums people opt for the "predefined" and say, on BSN, you have people declaring that they won't touch the Witcher unless they can make Geralt bisexual or a woman : )

I love this place.

 

[gregski]

It's actually interesting to see that here on The Witcher forums people opt for the "predefined" and say, on BSN, you have people declaring that they won't touch the Witcher unless they can make Geralt bisexual or a woman : )

I love this place.

THIS place or that place?

 

[Luxorek]

THIS place or that place?

Well... let's say... when I want to talk with reasonable and intelligent people I go here. When I want to laugh [or feel sorry for myself] I go to BSN. And let's leave it at that : ]

 

[volsung]

I don't think open character creation necessarily means you'll end up with a babbling idiot without any relevant lines, that's just how it has been implemented. For instance, appearance could be largely irrelevant for writing and used to determine certain reactions, responses, lines, etc., opening/closing dialogue or gameplay paths. Something similar but considerably more elaborate could be done for the racial differences Bloth described in games such as DA:O.

In my opinion, the current blank slate vs. predefined character is only an issue because most games have lazy writers AND most games want to offer a cinematic experience. In this case, so called "blank slate" is a terrible choice. A game like the first Fallout doesn't necessarily predefine our character but it restricts it (human, vault dweller, 18-45 or something like that). Whether we choose to play as a woman or man, or be greedy or helpful is up to us and somehow, things make sense.

Fallout 1 and many other "old school" games were written with the consideration that many lines would not be read (or heard) by many people. This is unthinkable nowadays, which leads us to this: there aren't very many real choices, which means whatever choices are available have to be generic enough to accommodate for most or all types of characters.

In any case, I like open ended character creation but not at the cost of writing. For capable designers with good writers on board, yes, open. For all other crap passing as pseudo RPG nowadays, "predefined".

 

[vivaxardas2015]

I prefer either per-defined, or something in-between, as Bioware did in DAO and ME. Unless it is a part of a story, PC should have his personal story, and his own voice. Bioware are not bad in this respect - in ME, for example, Shepard is a good compromise (the idea, not the execution, though). In any case, if the game isreally good, I am fine with any PC.

 

[Dona.794]

I like both.

Both can be fun to me, it really depends on the game and how the character fits the bigger picture. Well-written protagonists are tons of fun, then there are those you get only hints about and you can create your own image of them (Chell from Portal 2 comes to mind). Then there are those that are supposedly important to the game's plot but have the personality of a rock (looking at you, Corvo Attano) . Bloth made a good point regarding Skyrim, I had a lot of fun creating my character, her backstory, personality and so on, but the game's limitations made it all fall very flat in the end.

 

[Gilrond-i-Virdan]

I agree with Volsung. Both can be good if the game is done properly and story is well designed. I'd say in vanilla genres, predefined character is common for adventure games, while customizable is for the RPG. And many pen and paper RPGs are just great, even though one can make a custom character. Computer RPGs try to approach such experience, but of course you can't fully substitute a real DM with a predefined set of choices and situations, yet you can find great computer RPGs with generic character creation.

Those games which mix the genres should simply do it properly to achieve an enjoyable blend.

 

[Veleda.980]

Customizable, but the real crux is that I prefer a silent and first person protagonist. These games have much more replay value for me because they demand more engagement of me. Third person character means I take a passive role, and thus only a passive interest in even the best ones. Sorry, Geralt.

 

[goopit]

Both can be fun to me, it really depends on the game and how the character fits the bigger picture.

This,

Fallout New Vegas still had good writing even if the character was a clean slate.

 

[Blothulfur]

Customizable, but the real crux is that I prefer a silent and first person protagonist. These games have much more replay value for me because they demand more engagement of me. Third person character means I take a passive role, and thus only a passive interest in even the best ones. Sorry, Geralt.

I think this must be a personal thing because I always feel the opposite, when I can't see my character for most of the game and do not have that constant reminder of whom and what he is, then I kind of feel divorced from him. Happened in Underworld, Doom, New Vegas yadda, yadda. Then again variety is spice of life eh?

Edit: With you on mostly silent though, a few spoken lines for reference and he'll be speaking like that all the time in my head anyway, like Nameless.

 

[Gr3aves]

When i play an RPG, i wish to leave this world behind, and enter another one. As myself. So i'm going for a PC that i can create, from the earsize to the lengt of his toes.

Still waiting for the PC that has been completely voiced by 20 different voice actors. So that i can pick a voice which is most like mine. Until then, i'll have to talk to the screen myself, like i did in DA:O ^^

Here's hoping TW4 will feature a customisable Witcher.

 

[ReptilePZ]

When i play an RPG, i wish to leave this world behind, and enter another one. As myself.

 

[Seboist]

Pre-defined well written character for me. Those kinds of characters (Geralt, Jensen,Lee Everett,etc) felt more like "my" character due to the fact they feel more a part of the world(for the reasons Blothulfur mentioned) and how I could choose their rationales and the context for the choices they do(like the identity quest in TW1).

I'm not too big on the blank slate hermaphrodite errand boys in comparison.

 

[volsung]

I think there *should* be a game where we play as a hermaphrodite blank slate, literally. A blank stone tablet with both sexual organs.

 

[EliHarel]

I'm not sure if I'm being fair here: ideally I'd like a blank slate, but I don't think devs have the resources to do it properly, so I "prefer" predefined. Depth over breadth. Unless we get breadth with depth, but that seems unlikely.
Shepard was a great middle route.