Jump to content
  • Advertisement
Sign in to follow this  
BradyHearn

Putting yourself in the game design....

This topic is 2341 days old which is more than the 365 day threshold we allow for new replies. Please post a new topic.

If you intended to correct an error in the post then please contact us.

Recommended Posts

Im curious, has anyone ever come to the question of whether they should put themselves into a game, or even had to make that choice?

When Im working with film directors, especially with more documentary type films, but even other genres, there is always an absolute decision made on day one whether the filmmaker will be included in the film or not. For example with film, you can be asking questions to a subject(s) and only use their answers(edited answers) as the narration to the film and never show that you are directly involved. For example in game design, you could be narrating about why you are making the gameplay go in a certain direction and why you are doing what you are doing to the game player.

This may all seem a little pointless, but I am curious if it has ever been thought of this deeper than I can think of it.

Thanks!

Brady Hearn

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Advertisement
I guess it kind of depends on the game you are making. If the game is trying to tell a convincing story such elements might be out of place.

I think there are however certain aspects of some games that take these kind of things into consideration to a certain point. Take the silent hero as an example, a lot of thoughts can be interpreted as how the player wants it and perhaps this can be exploited to give indirect signals to the player where one must choose a path that has been designed in different ways for specific reasons. This can be communicated by the sidekick or whoever in such a way that the player can think about it.

One thing that also comes to mind is the movie The Life Aquatics with Steve Zissou. Perhaps you can make the game character be aware that he/she/it is in a game and let it talk about specific things: "Ha, this hill is blocking my view, I bet the designers didn't want me to see what is behind it yet to up the suspense!" or stuff like that.

I think this is a fun thing to think about, how you could handle such things without disrupting the suspension of disbelief if you still want to make a compelling story or anything, certainly not impossible, but might be challenging. I guess this is why some developers also add a developer commentary version of the game with their title to show how they did things though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Is your question a character in the game with your name and personality or the developer narrating in the game or voice acting?...

I wouldn't have a character in my game with my name but my personality. I think its hard to make a good character because you know yourself and making characters that all have different personalities isn't easy. If want to make good characters, make one like you. Wears clothes like you and talks like you. They don't need to be important characters. And you can watch and listen to other people if you need ideas for other people in your game.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I would advise avoiding it, since by placing yourself in the story you run the risk of stealing the show or focusing on yourself. A big ego can derail a story or make a character come off as a douche, and, no offense, but based on your model-esque picture my guess is you have a big ego.

I always stick to using facets of personalities rather than inserting the whole person into the game to avoid that problem, since cognitive dissonance can be a bitch (I have a huge ego). This way I run less a risk of minimizing or glossing over the character's flaws.

Just a thought.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Closest example I can think of is Lord British in the Ultima series. But that's more like putting a developer's role playing character into a game than having the developer in the game as himself. Personally, I'm not so sure that I'd want an in game character or a voice over explaining to me that I can't cross the river because it's actually the at the extent of the array that holds the tile map. Or even that the rescuing of a particular character is an allegory for something or other which gives the game a whole deeper meaning. I'd rather recognize those things on my own.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would advise avoiding it, since by placing yourself in the story you run the risk of stealing the show or focusing on yourself. A big ego can derail a story or make a character come off as a douche, and, no offense, but based on your model-esque picture my guess is you have a big ego.

I always stick to using facets of personalities rather than inserting the whole person into the game to avoid that problem, since cognitive dissonance can be a bitch (I have a huge ego). This way I run less a risk of minimizing or glossing over the character's flaws.

Just a thought.


I don't think he has a big ego because of his picture. It's more professional than most pictures on this website.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Reloadead_

I guess it kind of depends on the game you are making. If the game is trying to tell a convincing story such elements might be out of place.

One thing that also comes to mind is the movie The Life Aquatics with Steve Zissou. Perhaps you can make the game character be aware that he/she/it is in a game and let it talk about specific things: "Ha, this hill is blocking my view, I bet the designers didn't want me to see what is behind it yet to up the suspense!" or stuff like that.

I think this is a fun thing to think about, how you could handle such things without disrupting the suspension of disbelief if you still want to make a compelling story or anything, certainly not impossible, but might be challenging. I guess this is why some developers also add a developer commentary version of the game with their title to show how they did things though.


Totally, this would kill your suspension of disbelief in most normal gameplay, as it would in a normal film. But what if a designer made a puzzle for you to solve that they themselves didnt know the specific outcome and it would be based off of decisions you made, letting the game developer actually tell you why he made you do what he did, to get the response he got out of you. I suppose the 'developer' could in this case be switched with a 'character who is creating a puzzle for you' and there wouldnt be anything special.....



I would advise avoiding it, since by placing yourself in the story you run the risk of stealing the show or focusing on yourself. A big ego can derail a story or make a character come off as a douche, and, no offense, but based on your model-esque picture my guess is you have a big ego.

I always stick to using facets of personalities rather than inserting the whole person into the game to avoid that problem, since cognitive dissonance can be a bitch (I have a huge ego). This way I run less a risk of minimizing or glossing over the character's flaws.

Just a thought.


Well, its just a discussion idea, I try not to offend with my picture.




I don't think he has a big ego because of his picture. It's more professional than most pictures on this website.


thanks



Closest example I can think of is Lord British in the Ultima series. But that's more like putting a developer's role playing character into a game than having the developer in the game as himself. Personally, I'm not so sure that I'd want an in game character or a voice over explaining to me that I can't cross the river because it's actually the at the extent of the array that holds the tile map. Or even that the rescuing of a particular character is an allegory for something or other which gives the game a whole deeper meaning. I'd rather recognize those things on my own.


Yes, but it would lead to interesting challenges in design, it reminds me of a scene In Mulholland Drive where you are watching a scene presented as part of the movie, until cameras slowly pulls back and you realize that you're in a tv studio. The deception Lynch pulls with the camera work makes the audience feel uneasy that the camera is telling them the whole truth about the scene, thus uneasy about what the director wants them to perceive, in a way, putting him in the film...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
As Reloadead_ is onto, this completely depends on the game design. It also depends on the context in which you place yourself. Typically, the lead game developers often place themselves in position in the game where they can be ridiculed or they're ridiculing themselves. Opposingly, if you make yourself high and mighty, it can be a very bad thing. Here are some examples:

  • Chris Metzen in WoW as Metzen the Reindeer (Winter's Veil holiday quest w/achievement)
  • Todd Howard in Oblivion in the subtle role of Sanguine (afaik). "Hey, is that guy voiced by...?"
  • In Fallout 2, Leonard Boyarsky was one of the guys who got kicked out and exiled from Vault City.
  • At the end of Doom 3, there's a secret room where the developers thank the players for having played the game.


    This can often produce a fraternal relationship between the developer and the player, which potentially affects sales. In WoW, the GMs can enter the game as oversized super-characters that everyone wants to see and talk to as they're strolling along a path. Similar to when royalty visits the common folk.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sign in to follow this  

  • Advertisement
×

Important Information

By using GameDev.net, you agree to our community Guidelines, Terms of Use, and Privacy Policy.

We are the game development community.

Whether you are an indie, hobbyist, AAA developer, or just trying to learn, GameDev.net is the place for you to learn, share, and connect with the games industry. Learn more About Us or sign up!

Sign me up!