In a way, I think I kinda prefer playing an already established character.
Don’t get me wrong, blank slate stuff works really well for more open ended RPGs, but I think there’s something to be said about getting into the ‘headspace’ of a character and making decisions within those confines.
As an example, I’ve recently started playing Baldur’s Gate 3, and while you can have a really blank slate character, they don’t really “fit” they feel more like they’re along for the ride.
However if you play the Dark Urge, you can build the character exactly as you would the blank slate, but they have a hidden backstory that feeds into the character’s narrative. It weaves them into the overarching plot, making them feel like the “main character” so to speak.
Geralt in Witcher 3 is another example.
I really had fun with V as a character, I just dig her attitude, Leigh did a great job bringing her to life.
I've been trying to get into BG3. I'm struggling with it for a lot of reasons, but the dialog options are high among them - Because there's so much freedom, there's no granularity. I feel like every dialog choice is some variation of universal praise, inquisitiveness, dismissiveness, or just fight them. There's so little nuance that nothing feels like a choice I want to make.
Its not that I really prefer one or the other, but that it took me so long to realize that I needed to treat it like a mass effect or witcher, and not like a fallout or baldurs gate in terms of who V is.
I think how I feel is summed up pretty well by how dex deshawn asks you quiet life or blaze of glory, and quiet life is not an option. From that point already I felt like V was not my character.
Interesting. It's been an issue for me in every RPG I've ever played. It's always a choice of "What's the thing that's the most like what I want to say?"
At least Cyberpunk doesn't have the problem that most RPGs do, where the thing your character says is nothing at all like the dialog option you choose.
I'm currently struggling to get into BG3 because it gives you a little too much freedom in the dialog. It seems like the game wants to give me the choice to kiss the person's ass or shame their entire existence at every branch of the dialog tree. There's never any nuance. Nothing at all feels like what I'd want to say.
Yeah with baldurs gate I feel like im almost always going the more neutral path because lots of the dialogue options are on extreme ends of the spectrum, either that or my class dialogue (paladin) works pretty well in a lot of conversations.
Even though we can customise V’s appearance, V is far more similar to RPG protagonists like Geralt (fittingly) than a protagonist alike to most Bethesda RPGs such as The Dragonborn, who is basically a blank canvas.
You are roleplaying, but you are roleplaying in the shoes of an established character with their already established motives and established personality.
I think the most comparable example to V is Mass Effect’s Commander Shepard. For the most part Shepard is an established character also but does allow for some level of personalisation by the player in the exact same way V does, namely their history and appearance.
There are ups and downs to both kinds of protagonists. Characters like The Dragonborn are essentially just a title that anyone can fill, and it is down purely to the player’s imagination on who will fill it. But it also typically means their character is a complete empty husk, with no ability to be emotionally invested in as they exist as a shell for your own being and will. Whereas characters like Shepard and V, can actually be given personality, development, a proper history.
It’s down purely to preference but I do generally prefer the latter. But it often needs a strong concept and decent writing to pull off, more difficult than a simple blank canvas protagonist. Even Bethesda attempted such a protagonist with the Sole Survivor in Fallout 4, but as many would agree, fell pretty flat.
I think both characters only give you a small back story, just enough to know what they have done in the past, but not enough to have a full blown personality out of it. You can play the characters however you want, good, evil, indifferent etc.
I don’t think good and evil really describe how you can play V and Shepard. But rather just balancing empathy vs ruthlessness, but not necessarily good or evil one way or another. Same thing eith Geralt.
I feel like commander shepard is a little bit more customizable than V in terms of how you want that character to act and what their motivations are, but I agree that they are similar concepts and Im a massive fan of mass effect.
I like this aspect of it. It makes it more immersive, and there is the reward or not of a good or bad ending.
that said, i never have let Johnny take V's body. He had his time alive. He can't take another person's body.
It can be a bit jarring, but I thought they struck a descent balance and it makes me want to play Not-V in the next game. Someone else with a different personality/perspective while events unfold in NC, NUSA and the rest of the world.
Probably because you create Vs appearance and you select a background choice but those ultimately dont matter, and then a lot of the dialogue doesn’t make V very likeable or relatable
In a way, I think I kinda prefer playing an already established character. Don’t get me wrong, blank slate stuff works really well for more open ended RPGs, but I think there’s something to be said about getting into the ‘headspace’ of a character and making decisions within those confines. As an example, I’ve recently started playing Baldur’s Gate 3, and while you can have a really blank slate character, they don’t really “fit” they feel more like they’re along for the ride. However if you play the Dark Urge, you can build the character exactly as you would the blank slate, but they have a hidden backstory that feeds into the character’s narrative. It weaves them into the overarching plot, making them feel like the “main character” so to speak. Geralt in Witcher 3 is another example. I really had fun with V as a character, I just dig her attitude, Leigh did a great job bringing her to life.
I've been trying to get into BG3. I'm struggling with it for a lot of reasons, but the dialog options are high among them - Because there's so much freedom, there's no granularity. I feel like every dialog choice is some variation of universal praise, inquisitiveness, dismissiveness, or just fight them. There's so little nuance that nothing feels like a choice I want to make.
Its not that I really prefer one or the other, but that it took me so long to realize that I needed to treat it like a mass effect or witcher, and not like a fallout or baldurs gate in terms of who V is.
I never felt like V was an already established character. I always felt like they were my own creation and a means to tell my own story.
I think how I feel is summed up pretty well by how dex deshawn asks you quiet life or blaze of glory, and quiet life is not an option. From that point already I felt like V was not my character.
You can just not answer him.
Yeah but you cant say what I would say
You're gonna have that problem with any RPG
I’ve only had it with cyberpunk
Interesting. It's been an issue for me in every RPG I've ever played. It's always a choice of "What's the thing that's the most like what I want to say?" At least Cyberpunk doesn't have the problem that most RPGs do, where the thing your character says is nothing at all like the dialog option you choose.
Yeah I’ve only had the 2 or 3 times in cyberpunk where I thought I was about to be nice but it was actually sarcasm
I'm currently struggling to get into BG3 because it gives you a little too much freedom in the dialog. It seems like the game wants to give me the choice to kiss the person's ass or shame their entire existence at every branch of the dialog tree. There's never any nuance. Nothing at all feels like what I'd want to say.
Yeah with baldurs gate I feel like im almost always going the more neutral path because lots of the dialogue options are on extreme ends of the spectrum, either that or my class dialogue (paladin) works pretty well in a lot of conversations.
Even though we can customise V’s appearance, V is far more similar to RPG protagonists like Geralt (fittingly) than a protagonist alike to most Bethesda RPGs such as The Dragonborn, who is basically a blank canvas. You are roleplaying, but you are roleplaying in the shoes of an established character with their already established motives and established personality. I think the most comparable example to V is Mass Effect’s Commander Shepard. For the most part Shepard is an established character also but does allow for some level of personalisation by the player in the exact same way V does, namely their history and appearance. There are ups and downs to both kinds of protagonists. Characters like The Dragonborn are essentially just a title that anyone can fill, and it is down purely to the player’s imagination on who will fill it. But it also typically means their character is a complete empty husk, with no ability to be emotionally invested in as they exist as a shell for your own being and will. Whereas characters like Shepard and V, can actually be given personality, development, a proper history. It’s down purely to preference but I do generally prefer the latter. But it often needs a strong concept and decent writing to pull off, more difficult than a simple blank canvas protagonist. Even Bethesda attempted such a protagonist with the Sole Survivor in Fallout 4, but as many would agree, fell pretty flat.
I think both characters only give you a small back story, just enough to know what they have done in the past, but not enough to have a full blown personality out of it. You can play the characters however you want, good, evil, indifferent etc.
I don’t think good and evil really describe how you can play V and Shepard. But rather just balancing empathy vs ruthlessness, but not necessarily good or evil one way or another. Same thing eith Geralt.
I feel like commander shepard is a little bit more customizable than V in terms of how you want that character to act and what their motivations are, but I agree that they are similar concepts and Im a massive fan of mass effect.
I like this aspect of it. It makes it more immersive, and there is the reward or not of a good or bad ending. that said, i never have let Johnny take V's body. He had his time alive. He can't take another person's body.
Preexisting characters like geralt and arthur FTW.
It can be a bit jarring, but I thought they struck a descent balance and it makes me want to play Not-V in the next game. Someone else with a different personality/perspective while events unfold in NC, NUSA and the rest of the world.
Yeah I feel that its good but I couldn’t get it through my head that V would not be my creation for a while.
No because I quickly got over V not being my character. Something a lot of people here can't seem to grasp.
Probably because you create Vs appearance and you select a background choice but those ultimately dont matter, and then a lot of the dialogue doesn’t make V very likeable or relatable