Why do we praise the same characters over and over?

[(name here)]

The reason we keep seeing the same X, be it plot, character, gameplay, or art style, over and over is that someone did it and it was good. The thing is, stuff doesn't stop being good by virtue of being done over and over, or even done badly over and over. People like that archetype when well-implemented, so it keeps showing up.

 

[deathbydeath]

Quality and originality are two separate metrics. I don't see why you have this question.

 

[CrazyCrab]

Dear lord, It seems like my post makes me seem like a hipster douche that complains about games just for the sake of complaint. I guess i shouldve called it something else. As someone who writes stories just for fun I seem to get into character too much, sorry about that. Now that I read it it does sound kinda angry.
In any case, Im actually far away from being angry or annoyed - I actually liked those games at least most of the time. What Im actually wondering about is why those characters are so popular. Making a little game myself I do not have anything like that. No ragged men or little girls, despite the fact that It is a 'zombie' survival game. I still have good feelings about it though. At least its fun to make and thats all that counts ^^

My main and only question is why the game designers, who have a chance to shine pick a stereotype. If it was up to me Id do my best to make it unique.

 

[jamail77]

My main and only question is why the game designers, who have a chance to shine pick a stereotype. If it was up to me Id do my best to make it unique.

It's because, unless you're not making something clear or I'm misinterpreting something, you're cherry-picking an aspect of a character that most people didn't recognize because it was overshadowed by another aspect and/or didn't care because it was simply a piece in a much grander and more appreciated design and/oror because THEY actually enjoyed the excecution of said aspect of characterization over how common it is. These arguments often are based on a foundation of taking things out of context and extending or exaggerating it if not misinterpreting it outright. In the end, all characters and all stories share things in common. It's not that you don't have a point at all, but you're not doing a good job of defending it. I'll just quote some above rather than continue to write out another overly long response...again...for the billionth time in the billionth forum discussion...I need help...

Spoiler: This person understands good implementation of a common trope

The reason we keep seeing the same X, be it plot, character, gameplay, or art style, over and over is that someone did it and it was good. The thing is, stuff doesn't stop being good by virtue of being done over and over, or even done badly over and over. People like that archetype when well-implemented, so it keeps showing up.

Spoiler: When your argument can be defeated by simply referring to a TVTropes argument rather than the person disagreeing with their own laid out argument that's not a good sign

As TVTropes puts it, Tropes Are Not Bad. If your contention is that characters are the "same character" because of some basic shared elements of backstory (or characterization, etc) then your argument isn't very good.

Spoiler: This one kind of felt like gloating to me but it's still a good reiteration of points above

Spoiler: You are correct

Just because plot can be summarized by "Rugged guy trying to help a young girl" doesn't mean that characters are the same or plot is stereotypical in any way. Hell, my favorite movie of all time, The Last Samurai, is basically "Pocahontas in Japan". There are countless nuances to each story that makes them unique. Joel is nothing like Lee and Ellie is nothing like Clementine.

Spoiler: You are correct also

The Last of Us started developement right after Uncharted 2, so in that regard it's late to the party eventhough it started out before it became a thing.

I think both The Last of Us, The Walking Dead, and Bioshock: Infinite being so similar in concept and released so close together was just a coincidence. I think it was also born from the collective need to put a different spin on the 'hero/damsel' genre.

I had the same opinion right before TLoU got released. "Oh look, the old war horse and the spry, innocent little girl. How original." And I was fresh off The Walking Dead and sorta done with the whole Uncharted formula too. It wasn't till I played the game that I realized this was going to be something quite different. TLoU actually carefully avoids the steps of The Walking Dead.

Spoiler: So many correct people!

Because a good character with excellent characterization is a good character with excellent characterization. It doesn't matter what general pool they fall into, if a character is well written, nuanced, and well acted, why shouldn't we praise them? If you want something truly original, you're going to have to find some incredibly abstract art house title because that's the only place you're going to get it. Apart from that, if you show me a character archetype, I'll show you a previous iteration.

It's all about the EXECUTION in games like The Last of Us and The Walking Dead and etc. etc. that are going to be the difference makers. What sets them above the rest and earns the praise they get. And games like those have bloody fantastic execution. At least in my humble opinion.

I recently watched a JesuOtaku review [http://blip.tv/jesuotaku/madoka-magica-review-6332312] that made some good points that I think are relevant here: Just being "different" for differences sake isn't automatically a good thing. Like...saying a game/movie/show/etc. is good just because "ERMEHGERD IT'S SOOOOO DARK GUISE!" doesn't automatically make it "better" or more valid over more lighthearted fair. The Nolan Batman series isn't automatically better than the Marvel movies solely because one is "darker and grittier" than the other's brighter/more fantastical style. Those are just elements and tools the artists can use to bring their vision to life. If one doesn't know how to properly use said tools to create something worthwhile, thennnn it's kinda all for naught and you're going to have a lackluster product.

For example, Spec Ops: The Line could have QUITE easily have sucked if the game developers didn't do their due diligence to craft its punishing, unforgiving, almost taunting world you're placed in and made Walker such a psychological mess that you don't know if it's the character or you that's the fucked up one. It had all the window dressings of an Apocalypse Now, but if it just rested its laurels on that and not strived to give itself its own identity, it would have been simply been an Apocalypse Now knockoff instead of the unique experience it is. Plenty other modern war games have tried and failed at the "Ohhhh boy, war really sucks huh?" angle where Spec Ops succeed. Because it's all in the details, my friend

....and on the flip side, Neverdead showed us something "different" that we've never seen before and it sucked.

So again, simply being different won't matter very much if it isn't any good. *shrugs*

Spoiler: And here's something I said earlier with appropriate snips. Still overly long, haha

[SNIP] There are other games. To be frank, I feel as though this trend came relatively recently, it was around before but not to the extent and notoriety it is now. Mr. K is right: Take this far enough and you could include Tetris, not that you are taking it that far. There is a fair amount of accountability and reason to your beefs [after all].

I don't think it's a coincidence that the problem you're having is not what is focused on in reviews by both [players] and professional reviewers/critics, at least not as a problem of being overly derivative, original, cliche, and what not. The only OTHER people who SEEM to mention it in the games you listed that are, for all intents and purposes, universally acclaimed seem to be the same people with terrible logic who twist it to argue these same games are sexist and propagating stereotypes. It's not the focus and it's clear the female characters can endure, maybe even better than the main male character, yet cynics can't help focusing on the negative.

[SNIP] I have yet to see one who can make a decent argument that it bothered them without pretending the game was going for that in full; even then, the "blatant propagation and offense" argument usually isn't structured well and has holes. [SNIP]If it bothers you personally then nothing we say can change that. You don't HAVE to defend your opinion. Making a case is a whole other story however.

 

[beastro]

Hi everyone,
I never really gave it this much thought, but today I realized how freaking bored I am of the characters that seem to pop up in every AAA title. Why does everyone worship the Last of Us` story line when its essentially a copy paste from The Walking Dead? Rugged, manly main character with a questionable past? Check. Adventures with a girl who he just ends up with even though it was not the 1st thing he wanted to do? Check. The girl despite a pile of zombies and gore everywhere seems sort of ok with it? Check. Hell, I´d shaking more than a vibrator 90% of the time in the situations in that game yet those little girls look like superheroes. A bad human that tries to kill the main protagonist while being cunning and trying to convince the girl that everything is alright? Check...

The worst thing is that its not even just those 2 games. Why does Bioshock Infinite follow the exact same pattern when it comes to characters? Why does even freaking Dishonored, one of my favorite games of all time, have to have a little girl in it who needs to be saved? Why does even the How To Survive, something as silly as that, have an entire mini chapter devoted to saving a girl?

Even though it may seem like I`m mad, its just pure confusion. I really don't get the mass appeal in trying to save a girl. Don`t get me wrong, its alright for a story line to be focused around it, but why does every game do it? Is it something psychological, the need to save females from danger, the greatest instinct of all gamers? I honestly dont get it. Why cannot it be a boy or a sibling? Also, why does almost every main protagonist has to be a middle aged, tough looking man with a questionable past? Why cannot it be someone else?

Because post-apocalyptic worlds and dangerous crisis' provoke the breakdown of society and reducing us to our primal natures, a part of which in males is fatherhood and protecting what's really important when all else is being taken from you.

 

[TheMigrantSoldier]

Well-written characters can come out of reused (Even clichéd) archetypes. Your comparison is a pretty big stretch, anyway. It's all about execution. The characters can be "generic protective guy" and "generic needs-to-be-saved girl" or they can be Lee and Clementine. I haven't played TLoU but Joel and Ellie sound very little like the two mentioned.

 

[TheCommanders]

I feel like I say this a lot in discussions of this nature but it's an important point. Everything is in the execution. Yes, there are a lot of similarities between many stories, but, taking your first example, I felt much more invested in Joel and Ellie's story than Whatshisface and Clemantine. Part of it, admittedly, is that I really hate the art style of the walking dead (purely personally preference) but mostly it's because the way their story arc was written resonated more with me than that of... the other two. I'm sure there's people who loved the walking dead pair, but found Joel and Ellie as boring as I found blandymcblackguy and enforcedcutecharacter.

Take the heroes journey, a template a truly ludicrous number of stories follow religiously. Are the good members of this group to be exempt from praise because they stole the idea from Cambell? No. Because that would be dumb. As a teacher once told me, ideas are cheap, everyone has millions. It's how you present them that people remember. My point is, who cares if a lot of stories use the same frameworks? They're different enough that I continuously find new things to enjoy (or not) in each new work.

 

[[REDACTED]]

I guess I can take this as an opportunity to bring up Katawa Shoujo? Oh that works pretty well actually, in Hanako's Route (read: The only route you should ever take you heartless monster) if you keep going with the main character's MASSIVE White Knight crusade to "save" her you get her worse ending. Incidentally, her route is one of the only game examples I can think of where sex is a natural character development thing and is not just a throwaway minigame. It is actually integral to the plot. Keep up Bioware, if a few random collaborators on fucking 4Chan can do it you have no excuse.

I do agree with the save little girls thing, though that's because I fucking loathe all children ever with one exception and even she took tens of hours to get over. Yeah as good as Walking Dead is, sorry but my mind has a cap on child characters and Clementine is in 90% of scenes

Surprisingly, with the many gripes I have with Last of Us, Ellie is not among them at all. She's alright.

I would like more Spec Ops type stuff. As in focusing intensely on one character throughout the game, not so much the accidental genocide. Christ the seemingly rational conclusions Walker jumps to are staggering in hindsight.

You dare suggest that Rin isn't the best by far?

This means war my friend. This means war.

Anyway, as much as I would like to derail this thread into gushing about Katawa Shoujo, I like to think I'm better than that. Occasionally. Back to the OT! As other people have said more eloquently than me, it's not the formula used that counts, it's how that formula is used. What separates The Walking Dead or Bioshock Infinite from your typical damsel in distress story is how much respect they have for the characters in question. You don't get attached to Clementine because the story tells you have to, but because you've grown to appreciate and admire her as a person. Without that, her story would hold about as much appeal as the baby game from The Stanley Parable.

When a writer thinks they can substitute a haphazardly thrown-together collection of appealing characteristics for an actual, developed character, it shows. And no matter how many of the father-daughter bonding bingo squares they fill, we don't talk about them because they're just not interesting.

P.S @Wykydtron: As much as Hanako's sex scene did impact the plot, I think it could have been handled in a much less cringeworthy way. Had they just written Hanako as being a bit more explicit in her consent the plot would have been relatively unchanged, and I would have felt a lot less like I needed a hundred showers and a Hisao voodoo doll.

Edit:

Dear lord, It seems like my post makes me seem like a hipster douche that complains about games just for the sake of complaint. I guess i shouldve called it something else. As someone who writes stories just for fun I seem to get into character too much, sorry about that. Now that I read it it does sound kinda angry.
In any case, Im actually far away from being angry or annoyed - I actually liked those games at least most of the time. What Im actually wondering about is why those characters are so popular. Making a little game myself I do not have anything like that. No ragged men or little girls, despite the fact that It is a 'zombie' survival game. I still have good feelings about it though. At least its fun to make and thats all that counts ^^

My main and only question is why the game designers, who have a chance to shine pick a stereotype. If it was up to me Id do my best to make it unique.

Sorry, didn't see your post when I wrote mine. As for why those characters are so popular, I think it may be due in large to part to coincidence: all the examples you listed just so happened to be extremely well-written games. I guess those character's vulnerability does add to it somewhat. First, you set up a likable character and then, once the player's grown at least somewhat attached to them, you exploit their fear of losing them? Maybe. I honestly have no idea, but it is an interesting question.