Newsgroups: rec.arts.int-fiction
Path: gmd.de!Germany.EU.net!mcsun!uunet!haven.umd.edu!darwin.sura.net!newsserver.jvnc.net!siemens!princeton!ernie.Princeton.EDU!jacobw
From: jacobw@ernie.Princeton.EDU (Jacob Solomon Weinstein)
Subject: Re: Player Character Personality
Message-ID: <1993Mar31.221853.3064@Princeton.EDU>
Originator: news@nimaster
Sender: news@Princeton.EDU (USENET News System)
Nntp-Posting-Host: ernie.princeton.edu
Organization: Princeton University
References: <733474312snx@hinrg.starconn.com>
Date: Wed, 31 Mar 1993 22:18:53 GMT
Lines: 76

The comments preceded by ">>" are mine. Those preceded by ">" belong to
Mike Roberts.

>> If you think about it, the player character of just about every
>> IF game has one personality trait:  creative problem solving.
>
>True, but this is a bit limiting, and also a bit narrow; it doesn't
>say all that much about the rest of your personality.  Most of the
>programmers I know are creative problem solvers, but that doesn't
>make them otherwise very similar.

Yes, I agree. I'm not saying that this is full and ripe
characterization. My point is simply that it _is_ characterization of a
sort, but it's just become such a cliche that we cease to notice it.

>> First, you can generally tell somebody's character by the
>> sequence of actions they perform.
>
>Only if you have more intelligence than the average computer, though :)
>I know - you're not talking about having the computer deduce the
>characteristics from the actions, but rather the opposite:  setting
>up a series of events that defines (in the mind of the player) the
>player character.

You're right that I meant it the other way around, but your joke has some
validity. There are some games where, depending on your sequence of
actions, you end up joining either the good guys or the bad guys. One
could create a game in which every initial puzzle had a "moral" solution
(befriend the dragon by feeding him, say) and an "immoral" solution
(torture the dragon until he gives you what you want). Once the player
established a pattern of behavior, he would be pressured by the game
into maintaining it. That is, if you start of by acting evil, you will
later find that behaving well simply meets with suspicion, and the only
option that works is immorality. I realize that this is a simple
binarism, and only marginally more complex as characterization, but it
is a start.

>> If one were to write a game that required the player to
>> slaughter a kitten in order to obtain a treasure, the player character's
>> personality would be very different.
>
>However, it seems to me that making your puzzles loaded with characterizing
>significance would be almost as irritating as just telling the player how
>he feels.  I don't want to slaughter the kitten slowly using the blender;
>sorry, you have no choice if you want to fool the lab attendant into thinking
>you work here.  The only coherent character trait that could emerge would
>be:  this is a person obsessed with a goal -- and nothing will stand in
>his/her way!

Yes, you're absolutely right. Under the circumstance you described, that
is precisely the character that would emerge. It may be developing an
unpleasant character, but it is characterization nonetheless. If you
wish to make the player character more likeable, make the solutions to
a few puzzles simply to be random acts of kindness, or reward the player
some other way for performing them. Or set things up so that any action
by the player results in disaster, but solutions drop into his lap-- and
you have a sketch of a character who is incompetent but succeeds through
luck.


It seems to me that there are two general ways to characterize the
player character. The first is by fiat: just tell the player things like
"You (or King Arthur, or whoever) cannot describe the wonderful feeling
that washes over you when you give the bread to the poor boy." What I'm
arguing for is something that I think is more subtle, and more
effective: get the player to characterize himself. 

You can do this by giving him a wide range of options, and keeping 
track of which ones he picks, as in my moral solution/immoral solution 
example. Or you can trick him into characterizing himself as you wish 
him to, by rewarding him for certain sorts of actions and punishing him 
for others. This reward can be as traditional as letting him solve a
puzzle, or it can be something entirely different. Perhaps your reward
for being kind (or cruel, or whatever the author wishes to make the PC)
is just that you get a fuller story. 

