Do you view the player-character as "you"?

[FPLOON]

Fuck no! And it's not because not all of them are of a black-based ethnicity... There's only been two games, so far, where I tried to create a black character to project my black self onto and one didn't matter and the other really didn't matter...

Other than that, all I'm doing is telling the PC where to go by deliberately controlling as much of their body as possible... Everything else is on a camera rail or some shit like that...

 

[The Almighty Aardvark]

Nah, I've never found the appeal of playing myself in a game. I treat games where I can create my character like pen and paper rpgs, I make a character who's distinctively not me, and make decisions that would be in their best interests. Often there's some similarities to me, and aspects of myself that get put into the character (It's hard, and not always ideal to have it otherwise), but I still treat them like a separate entity.

I still disagree with you in your other thread. I like making my own character, even though it isn't me. There's some games where that's desirable (Free games where there isn't as much of a linear plot), and then there's games where it's preferable to have a predefined character. Either way, I like having the option for both, wherever they're best suited

I'm not exactly sure how the "Play as yourself" method lends to replayability. I'm guessing you either only play as yourself once, or never bother replaying the game?

 

[Silence]

Never. Either I play the established story of one character, or I role-play different self-created characters.

I think the closest would be playing an ideal form of myself, but that happens very rarely. And well, it's never "me", since gender is flipped and probably some other stuff.

 

[nomotog_v1legacy]

Some times they are me some times they are not. It's not really based on if they are customized or not. Shepard isn't me, they are mine, but not me. Same with the boss (SR2).

 

[ThreeName]

Never. I play characters, not self-insertion. I'm already me, why would I pretend to be me again?

 

[cleric of the order]

As much as I would a tool, a car, etc.
Thy are an extension of my will, a tool but not my actually person hood in the majority of instances

Never. I play characters, not self-insertion. I'm already me, why would I pretend to be me again?

Pretty much this, why the fuck would I want to shove boring old self into what I'm playing
If I'm not mistaken in general a person named Adrian shore did a study on that, from what I heard the results that suggests this is somewhat widespread.
I don't know myself, it's behind a paywall

 

[ThreeName]

If I'm not mistaken in general a person named Adrian shore did a study on that, from what I heard the results that suggests this is somewhat widespread.
I don't know myself, it's behind a paywall

Do you have a link to it? I might have access through uni if it's actually in a legit journal

 

[[Kira Must Die]]

No, never.

I like to think of it as being an actor, playing a wide variety of characters.

Also, I want to be a writer, and I like coming up with different characters and stories.

 

[duwenbasden]

Nope, I always create different characters, with different backstories and interactions, and different archetypes. What I don't need is someone else creating a character for me and foolishly thinks he/she/it will be better than mine.

 

[Sean Renaud]

It depends heavily on the game. Commander Shepard was me, I'm the guy in Skyrim, I'm the guy in WWE Raw 2015, I'm not Mario, I'm not Cloud or Duke Nukem.

 

[Bocaj2000]

The player is the main character. That's the advantage of interactive media. Whether or not the game takes advantage of that is their challenge. Most games are roller coasters in which the player is along for the ride bringing them from one set piece to another. But the great games make the player an active member of the world and story. The player is the most important person as far as the game is concerned, but don't confuse that for the player being the most important character of the story. Interactive storytelling is still in its infancy with a lot to learn. Let's see how it develops.

 

[Fijiman]

To an extent, yes, but at the same time I know that I could never be the gun/sword wielding badass that I'm playing.

 

[FoolKiller]

I like both ways of doing stuff, but when its a blank slate, then it's usually me. Or a fantasy of me. Even if I play as a different gender I play it like I would be.

 

[Risingblade]

If I can name them then yes. since I usually use my own name.

 

[Canadamus Prime]

Usually yes. Since it's an interactive medium and I get to direct the actions of the character then I feel I can step into the shoes of the character and become the character. This is esp. true in games with extensive character creation systems 'cause then I get to truly define the character I want to become. This doesn't always happen, like with most JRPGs it doesn't. Even with the Dragon Quest games which allow me to give the hero a name, I still don't really think of the character as me.

 

[cleric of the order]

If I'm not mistaken in general a person named Adrian shore did a study on that, from what I heard the results that suggests this is somewhat widespread.
I don't know myself, it's behind a paywall

Do you have a link to it? I might have access through uni if it's actually in a legit journal

http://www.digra.org/wp-content/uploads/digital-library/11313.28005.pdf
I think this is it.It was something a friend of mine brought up like a couple months ago, and he did hand it to me but there might have been some miscommunication. I mean I at least remember it being behind a paywall.

 

[Rebel_Raven]

It varies from game to game, of course. I try to relate to the characters regardless, and the more I can relate, the more I enjoy myself. Lets look at Red Dead Redemption:

Spoiler

John Marston, despite being a dude, is one of the rare dudes I like enough to enjoy. That, coupled with the world, the setting, the lore, etc. red Dead is one of my favorite games, and my only gripe is that the unnamed woman from "who are you to judge" is never a playable character, even in multiplayer. Not the Promo-art woman, but the woman arguably inspired by "the Quick and the Dead."
I enjoyed, a bit, going way away from reality as he rode as a zombie in the DLC, but I prefer him not being a zombie.
All around, john's a great guy. A pleasure to listen to, a pleasure to experience the world with, and so forth.

Jack Marston: I can't stand him. his voice, the way he talks, and stuff. His personality, and the way his voice sounds just grates on me enough that I do't beat the main story anymore, and faff about before then. I simply cannot enjoy the game as Jack.

Generally on my first play through I have them do what I'd do in their shoes. If I can create a character I go somewhat reminiscent of myself.

Bluntly, when I play a game, I want to enjoy some escapism. I like creating a more ideal me, doing things in a more ideal way, and being as far away from the straight white guys that aren't well written.
When I game, I'm at the steering wheel but either the character is my vehicle, so to speak, or they're the passenger, and I have to put up with them for the entire trip.

 

[Xeros]

Only if it's a character I've created, which I usually model after myself, or if I'm presented with a choice that I really need to think about what I would do.

 

[Aetrion]

I don't view the character as me in any game, but I view myself as the force behind the character that makes all the decisions. Mario can't beat a level, only I can beat a level with Mario.
No matter what shape the character in a game takes, it is an avatar of my will, and I lay claim to anything it accomplishes under my control and it's failures are mine as well. In that sense, it's me without being me.