MC Backstories?

General
21

That’s the thing really, Nathan. You hit the nail on the head and it’s what I was trying to get across in my rambling post.

You feeling what you said in the spoiler is exactly what I want to try and get away from, plus I feel it’ll lead to a better story anyway, as you can focus on what’s important and not on including as many options as possible so everyone is catered to.

That said, I should make it clear that I don’t think people are wrong for wanting as much freedom as possible or to be the character. It’s just that there are different ways to tell a story, different strokes for different people, you know?

22

Exactly. For my story to avoid obligations, I threw the MC into a lawless way of life with nobody they truly have to look out for but themselves. That way you can choose either path with little consequences. I hope I can pull it off.

3 Likes
23

Right, well my intention wasn’t quantity over quality, if that wasn’t clear. True enough, if you’re making something artsy or deeply personal then by all means, be true to that.

What I’m trying to get at though, is that even if we truly make an effort at immersing ourselves in a character, there are just some things where our biases will shine through. An example;

The MC has a childhood friend, that the writer has decided the MC is ever so chummy with. Yet, perhaps the reader reads something else into how that friend acts and what they say, and finds them quite offputting. Do you then think anyone would discard their own bias just because the MC is “supposed” to like this so called friend? In a perfect world, we’d be able to partake of other views other than our own, instead of just looking at them from the outside, but that isn’t the way things generally work.

You can’t really have a game, where you don’t in some respect view yourself as the character or rather, view the character through your own ideals and with your perception and biases. Except perhaps in visual novels lacking any and all choice, and I refuse to call those games anyways, but of course you’ll still be passing judgement on those characters and how they act anyhow.

Do you just want to tell your story and have the players partake of it, or do you want the players to make their own stories, that’s where choices come in. At the end there, you seem to be on the same page, but I’m not sure.

24

Oh I definitely prefer a MC with a back story. Ideally it’s something the reader gets to choose, and influence, but even if it’s completely out of the reader’s control I still prefer it to the “mysterious stranger.”

4 Likes
25

Regarding paragraph 1, that wasn’t something I thought. That was just me being . . . well, me. I rambled. Probably said a lot of unnecessary things. :wink: I just wanted to point out that the choices were more binary and perhaps less than you’d usually find, before addressing the fact I don’t think it has to be railroaded. A bit of a contradiction, I guess, in some areas.

Anyway, I’m going to cut this post much shorter than I intended and simply answer your final question, as I don’t want to take over the thread. I’m more than happy to discuss it privately though or in a different thread, especially with being an RPG and interactive story lover at heart who constantly shakes his head at all of the ‘choices don’t matter’ debates. :wink:

The answer is both. You can do both, rather than being forced to pick one or the other. I want to tell my story, but I also want the reader to shape it and interact with the story. To give an indication, chapter 1 currently splits in two, which is why less than 50% of the content is seen per read, not counting the smaller differences, before the threads rejoin for chapter 1’s end. Chapter 2 again splits into two or three (which I’m currently writing) based on what happened in chapter 1, before the threads rejoin again. Not that I think I can make each chapter branch, but there you are.

That said though, I guess you could say you’re always going through the author’s story. It’s just that in interactive stories, the author is simply trying to give as many variations as they can on the same story. As Max Gladstone put it, I think, an interactive story allows an author to write out all of the ‘what-if’ paths or options they would have ordinarily cut and gives the reader some control/say in how things unfold.

1 Like
26

That sounds like a well duh statement, obviously it’s still gonna be the writer’s story being told no matter how many choices are in there, I was just speaking metaphorically. But I have a feeling this is one of those internet miscommunication things where we’re both trying to say the same thing but we both think the other is disagreeing. XD

27

My opinion is that context determines everything.

A past is very important in certain stories - Choice of Vampire, Zombie Exodus, and your current WiP are all examples where it is important to me…

A past is not as important in other stories: A Choice of Robots, the many hero stories and Vampire House are stories where background is less important.

A general rule is: The more important the past is to the future story, the more important the background is to me. In your current WiP, a developed background explains the context of the current story… that is necessary for me to appreciate the MC.

I hope this helps.

1 Like
28

Well yes, it is kind of a ‘duh’ statement. But many people seem to think the characters and stories are their own. (Granted, the story part is more prevalent with stuff like Telltale’s games, rather than with CoGs, I think)

‘Why does my character do this when I don’t want them to?’

‘Why am I forced to be friendly with this character?’ (Sorry, not mentioning this one because of what you said, so just in general)

‘Well, the way it ended clashed with my story/character’.

It’s a problem really with design. By having a more or less set character, rather than a generic one, it’s something that can be mitigated (not entirely, but there you are, as people will still project themselves onto the character with people saying things like ‘my Clem’ in Telltale’s The Walking Dead for instance). It also allows you to have a more cohesive story in my view.

But yes, I’m sure we’re on the same wave-length.

29

Well it could also be construed as praise. The fact that someone wants to make it their own character could be viewed as a testament to the quality of the game. Or human nature. Either way, you’re right in that it can’t really be solved, only mitigated.

1 Like
30

I guess it could be. I suppose I just look at it as something that they automatically assume that they’ll be able to do no matter the interactive story they’re going through.

I was wanting to make an edit to my previous post to expand on something, but I’ll just post the majority of what I wanted to say here. Basically, what I’m trying to get at is the following, outside of trying to mitigate people thinking they’re not offered the correct choices and such:

Let’s imagine a theoretical version of Jim’s game/story, A Wise Use of Time. The MC suddenly finds out she/he’s capable of stopping time. Currently, you can choose to take advantage of your power and steal things or you can choose to not do so. There’s some back-story present, but there’s no previously defined character personality? It’s generic so you can mold the role, no?

Now let’s make the character partially set, key phrase being ‘partially set’, not ‘totally set’. Let’s say he/she’s by definition a good person (though everyone’s really shades of grey in my view). Suddenly, they find they have the ability to stop time. I think anyone would experience a conflict if they found they had that power. Rather than just doing things because you’re not a nice person, you can have what was ordinarily a good person commit crimes. You can show the struggle between doing the right or wrong thing because you added some texture to the character, while still leaving the choice to the reader. And maybe, just maybe, characters will reference how you’ve changed. In fact, I think there’s a potentially powerful element there if written well, a character’s fall from grace if the ‘bad’ options are chosen.

That’s essentially what I think a set, or ‘partially set’ because everyone’s version of a story/character will be different after the story starts, character offers writers and readers. A more textured story and such, while still offering the interactive elements.

All this said, it’s key to note it simply doesn’t fit all games/stories. It depends. So really, if the OP wants to add a backstory or what have you (elements not set by the player), then they should do so. Some stories/games are perfectly fine with a generic character and such. I’ve only added this so people know I’m not saying adding a background etc. is the only way to go. Anyway, I’m going to shut up now.

31

There are always going to be instances where it works, and where it doesn’t (work as well at least). Like take your example, the MC was a good person. There isn’t much conflict there, if the canon states that the MC was a good person, then that’s the way it was.

But then take my earlier example, you are supposed to be friends with this person, who you as the reader can’t relate to on any given level. There you get some friction.

UNLESS, in both cases, you are given the option to choose your present state/course of action. Maybe you used to be good, but maybe you’re not anymore. Maybe this person really used to be your friend, but now you feel has changed for the worse. Maybe you were only friends because obligation, pity, any number of reasons.

This: [quote=“DavidGil, post:30, topic:14490”]
And maybe, just maybe, characters will reference how you’ve changed. In fact, I think there’s a potentially powerful element there if written well, a character’s fall from grace if the ‘bad’ options are chosen.
[/quote]

Except remove the maybe, just maybe. If you don’t do it that way, if you remove those choices - If you’re forced to stay “friends” with this “friend” then that’s jarring, no matter what kind of story you’re trying to tell. However, it could be a story element, like co-dependence, the battered spouse who stays with the abusive spouse, that kind of thing.

It’s just not ideal to do it that way if you want the player to have control over their character’s actions. Like why can I do A but not B kind of situation. In a book, nobody has any expectations of control over a character, they just tag along.
In a game, they do. They have those expectations, and they are right to have them (within reason).

And yes, some of those limitations could well be the established personality/limitations/flaws or starting point of a character, but if the character doesn’t experience any growth or decline, then that’s not a very good story either.

32

Sorry, I’ll keep this brief. The idea would be that if the MC was friendly with someone, then they may no longer be friends because of the actions that have been taken since the story’s start. Certainly, at the very least, the relationship would be tested.

What should be taken away from what I’m saying is that the character’s past, relationships and everything else depending on how in-depth you want to go or what’s necessary for the story, should be set. Future events and relationships, as much as possible in order without the story becoming non-cohesive, should be open to change. So, a past relationship? It might indeed be possible for it to be broken.

I think we’re agreeing? At least I hope so. Maybe I was stupid to include that maybe bit, as I didn’t mean to imply that you should ‘possibly have them reference it and keep being friends’. Or that everything will remain rosy between them. Quite the opposite.

2 Likes
33

This is the link between the static past (which Snoe was questioning) and the development of the MC in a story. The future complexity of your MC is dependent on your past development and structure built.

A devise that I’ve seen different authors use to get around this linkage is amnesia. Even with this devise deployed, the actual success of a story’s future MC really depends on the past built prior to writing.

Sometimes, as an author, using amnesia types of interventions (eg “forgetfulness” spells, hits-to-the-heads, etc) will allow you to write the story first then develop the background necessary to be successful but usually a developed background will still be needed in those contexts where one is called for.

In Snoe’s story, our protagonist might be able to be as evolved later with having amnesia to begin with but unless a completed background is later revealed, the connection made between the reader and the MC would be lacking.

1 Like
34

We’re in agreement. I’ve not read Snoe’s story, but generally speaking, the more background work done, the richer the story can be.

One thing I do want to touch on though is what you’ve said regarding devices. More just as a little tip for people who may want to have a set background but still allow the reader some choice. You can have the MC think about something in the past, and the reader can choose what happens during that one segment, thus tailoring some of the context for events that follow. So, that’s something that can be done.

1 Like
35

In a game, I’d say there’s a really wide spectrum on this issue, and readers should try to align their expectations accordingly (though of course taste is different than expectation, and one’s taste may be decidedly for one end of the spectrum or the other – as both yours and DavidGil’s seem to be).

Some games are written so the playable character = you, the reader. Or whoever you, the reader, wants the character to be. DavidGil has described this as “generic” in a couple of places, and I think that’s often true – but I also think that’s because the reader is being implicitly drafted in as co-author, filling in the details, and that the character as ultimately experienced will not be generic because it will be personalised in imagination. Just read some of the threads here for e.g. Choice of Robots or Guenevere to see how non-generic people’s conception of their characters ends up being.

In other games, the playable character is definitely not you. It’s Leisure Suit Larry, or Tommy Vercetti, or the dad with the dying kid. If you come to this type of game with the expectation of control, you’ll be disappointed – as DavidGil notes that a number of players of Telltale games have been.

In this type of game, you’re implicitly being asked to act rather than write. Act out a character who is not you, or chosen by you… who will not always react as you would react under those circumstances. If we can get our expectations in line, those games can offer potentially a more powerful (and if the game is good enough, profoundly unsettling or revelatory) experience, taking us out of ourselves and letting us see a world through the eyes of the Other.

That said, I’d also note that a game with a generic playable character doesn’t have to be a game with a generic main character. Bioshock is the story of Andrew Ryan, not the weapon-wielding fists in the foreground of the screen. Myst, jumping back a few years, was the drama of the Book Brothers rather than their mute observer. And both of those games are of course world-driven as much as character-driven, where the settings have a rich and unfolding story. I’d argue that there can be great literary as well as entertainment value in generic-PC games, too.

2 Likes
36

I suppose it depends on how you define control. For instance in the Walking Dead, you still make choices for Lee and Clem. They are their own, but you shape them to a substantial degree. Same thing with the Wolf Among Us’s Bigby.

In other games, for instance Halflife 2, Gordon Freeman is hinted at being one way, but the player may act it out like a maniac jumping around on furniture and swinging a crowbar into people´s faces while they’re having a conversation with this mute lunatic. Same with Bioshock really, a lot of games where you’re hailed as a hero, yet you’re effectively a massmurderer. Skyrim; the bucket-on-head-placing, stealing dohvakin. The list goes on.

In the roleplaying community, there’s a big divide between game masters who railroad and those who sandbox. The only way you can really guarantee that the story you as the writer imagined gets told the way you want, is to put the player on tracks they cannot leave. But even in those games people tend to strive towards putting in the illusion of choice, because we want freedom, we don’t want to feel caged. I would say that’s inherent in all humans.

You’re right that even those games can be fun, but it’s usually because they managed to get the illusion of choice down. Or if it’s a natural arena game, like LoL, Dota etc.

2 Likes
37

I agree that a too detailed backstory can come across as restrictive,but not having any form of backstory to work with can be unfun too.It can be beneficial for a game to give the MC some resemblance of an identity before the player took over, instead of having the character essentially pop into excistance.

*In “orpheus rise” the MC joined an organization of psychics to help understand and train their powers.But the player is free to choose how to use the powers
*In “Curse of the Black Cat” the crew somethimes make references to previous tefts you have done together.But they don’t go into detail and as such those tefts do not contradict your current style
*In “reckless space pirates” the MC was origionally at a space station before ending up in a space pirate pirson cell.But the player is free to choose what kind of incident led their capture and how they feel about working with pirates.
*In “Yeti’s Parole Officer” the MC is just some random person aliens for some reason deside to give a warden job to.
I did not buy that game after playing the demo because that scenario was so immersion breaking.

Roleplaying your own character is nice,but it can help to have a porper starting point.

38

I’ve heard it described as a roller-coaster or sandbox but the idea is the same. In many games or interactive stories, the author may desire to tell the story the way they desire but invariably an audience will see a story different than what the author wanted. A recent example of this is Mass Effect’s much criticized endings - the authors tracked the story exactly how they wanted but the audience went on several different journeys and even arrived in different places than the authors wanted.

The roller-coaster idea is supposed to bring controlled highs and lows to the entire audience, yet they normally are flawed due to failings other than the story’s background.

A strongly developed background will benefit the roller-coaster type of game more than the sandbox (providing explanation to why the author’s tracked highs and lows occur) yet the players/readers of the sandbox story/game will bring many more experiences to bear with a strong background. It is ironic and some developers and authors do not see this until it is too late and their work is completed.

A weak background will provide the sandbox with more perceived “options” yet because there is an ill-defined beginning there might be fewer unique journeys being made. This is why a strong and complex background is as important in a sandbox game/story as it is in the roller-coaster game/story.

2 Likes
39

While that’s part of it, I think the divide we’re talking about here starts even earlier. “Railroad v sandbox” is about the plot of the story. This is also about the characters, pre-plot: whether you get to make your own from scratch, or whether the GM gives your wholly or largely pre-made ones with the plot-relevant aspects outside your control.

For a tabletop campaign, I greatly prefer sandbox and player-made characters – because tabletop gaming has an improvisational freedom and scope that computer games probably won’t have until I’m 90 years old and the AI is good enough. And a good GM will be able to work in roller coaster moments even in a sandbox. Playing through more restricted scenarios feels a bit like a waste of the medium.

But given that computer games even at their most interactive are still more akin to novels or movies, I think there’s a lot more room for authors to decide to tell specific stories and let you inside the mind and actions of the character, rather than letting you choose the personality, preferences, etc. of the character.

As is the desire for meaning and connection, which frequently throughout life comes into tension with the freedom urge.

In this case, some players/readers will be happy to trade total personality-shaping freedom for a character that feels more integrated into “real” relationships, culture, and history.

3 Likes
40

Sally Dark Rides makes a trackless interactive dark-ride where the show actually has two or three actual branches that occur based on the score the passengers have made hitting targets. The only way to make the vehicles take a different path through the environment and get to see the final treasure room is to score enough points.

This is much more akin to a Choicescript game - you’re on rails, but the author has created different possibilities of how the story can go and allows some freedom to switch tracks in a controlled manner.

This can even be heightened with more trickery - the Indiana Jones ride at Disneyland simulates an entrance with three different doors and different scenery. What the riders hopefully don’t know is that the track they are on stays the same, it’s the doors that move,and the same room beyond changes via lighting, sound, and different projections on the same scenery.

This is like offering a choice-reader the chance to enter their own name, and specify their background. Often they will read mostly the same text, but the author subtly varies it to coincide with the choices made.

These types of strategies can give the illusion of a freedom, despite every path (if not every combination along that path) being planned out in advance. Many games that seem to be freeform (such as Half Life 2) are actually railroaded, but the limits of the tracks are wide enough that the player doesn’t always notice them.

2 Likes