• Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!

2016: The State of the Mute Protagonist

Consider choosing the option
"GIVE ME MY SON YOU MURDEROUS MOTHERFUCKER" and having Kellogg react to that while the dialogue went assumed or unspoken.

It's kind of absurd. Regardless of how poor the VA, it plays better as a dialogue.

I honestly think having that be a silent convo option would have lent it more weight than the acting in the part did(I literally laughed when after a moment of silence considering my choices my character yelled that shit). Of course, that's as much a problem with the scripting there.
 
Sure I can give it a shot. In a first-person game I'm playing as a character, seeing the world through that character's eyes. Aside from hands that character doesn't really have any characteristics for me to identify with. Yes in games like Fallout, Metroid Prime, and Halo, you know what your character looks like but you aren't looking at that character interact with the world as you play. You usually only see that character in cutscenes.
in a first person game you are the character, that's the entire point of the mode. When you become the character, it's incredibly jarring to have a voice or even just moaning and grunting that doesn't align with your mental image of what you should sound like. It's even worse when the person talks and says things you never would say.

it's one of the reasons I think alien isolation is a horribly executed game. the constant whimpering, moaning, sniffling and coughing is completely immersion breaking, stuff like that doesn't work at all unless I'm feeling the exact same thing, in fact it only serves to remind me that hey this character isn't actually me so I don't have to worry. The point of a game like this is that I should become so immersed that when I'm sittning there with the controller in my hands I'm the one moaning and sniffling.
 
That bland comment is hilarious. The character is just boring because they don't speak. It's got nothing to do with me picking the more or less interesting choices. He's still a bland and incredibly dull character.

I think you're right that genres with boring main characters that don't speak is not my cup of tea. But to people that like them, congrats I suppose. I'm with the other poster that said it's one of the worst gaming mechanics in videogames, especially during and post PS2 era that should have died in a fire.

There's your problem, there is no "he" in the game, the game doesn't have a pre-set character. Saying the Courier is bland is the same thing as saying you're bland, I'm not sure why you're trying to argue this lol. The character talks, it just isn't voice acted because it would ironically ruin the immersion. You may not like it but that doesn't mean that it's a worse model than Witcher or Mass Effect.

There's a difference between Dishonored and New Vegas.
 
There's your problem, there is no "he" in the game, the game doesn't have a pre-set character. Saying the Courier is bland is the same thing as saying you're bland, I'm not sure why you're trying to argue this lol. The character talks, it just isn't voice acted because it would ironically ruin the immersion. You may not like it but that doesn't mean that it's a worse model than Witcher or Mass Effect.

There's a difference between Dishonored and New Vegas.
It is a worse model though. I care about Geralt and Sheppard, I don't care about the main of Fallout whatever their name is. You keep repeating this nonsense over and over again. The character is bland regardless of choices to me, not sure why you're not understanding this? If you enjoy that type of content, that's fine.
 
I don't have any problem with the silent protagonist (Im older and that's what Im used to anyway).

That said, when executed correctly, a voiced protagonist can hit the mark and really add to the game. (Geralt from Witcher 3, Michael Thornton, Alpha Protocol)

But when executed poorly with poorly written dialoge choices (or picking something you don't think will sound that way but it does) it can really detract from the game.

For my opinion, its all about the writing not whether the protagonist is voiced or not.
 
I really dislike mute main characters. I want to live in a world where everyone talks, even Link. It makes for an objectively better experience providing it's done right.
 
It is a worse model though. I care about Geralt and Sheppard, I don't care about the main of Fallout whatever their name is. You keep repeating this nonsense over and over again. The character is bland regardless of choices to me, not sure why you're not understanding this? If you enjoy that type of content, that's fine.

Because there's a difference between saying "I can't get immersed if my main character isn't voiced" and saying that silent protagonists in RPGs are a backwards model that should have died in the PS2 era while failing to see the benefits they provide to other people.
 
I don't have any problem with the silent protagonist (Im older and that's what Im used to anyway).

That said, when executed correctly, a voiced protagonist can hit the mark and really add to the game. (Geralt from Witcher 3, Michael Thornton, Alpha Protocol)

But when executed poorly with poorly written dialoge choices (or picking something you don't think will sound that way but it does) it can really detract from the game.

For my opinion, its all about the writing not whether the protagonist is voiced or not.

This is basically my opinion on it.
 
I really, really dislike voiced main characters in RPGs where you make your own. It ruined Mass Effect and the later Dragon Age games for me, and I didn't even bother to buy Fallout 4. I'm really hoping the next Elder Scrolls game doesn't have this nonsense, it breaks my immersion to have all my characters in that game sound the same.
 
Depends on the nature of the game, as well as the history of the character. For example, the Shin Megami Tensei games and their spin-offs are designed around your player character being a self-insert, so their protagonist needs to be mute. Also, some characters, like Link and Samus, really shouldn't talk because they hadn't/haven't for years and it's too easy to screw it up (and we've seen the results of Samus talking in Other M, where it was awful). Those characters should at most express themselves with their facial expressions, body language, and maybe some simple dialogue choices, which is similar to how Link was in Wind Waker and Skyward Sword.

Other than that, protags being voiced or muted just depends on how the story and dialogue are written.
 
Because there's a difference between saying "I can't get immersed if my main character isn't voiced" and saying that silent protagonists in RPGs are a backwards model that should have died in the PS2 era while failing to see the benefits they provide to other people.
silent protagonists is only a problem to people who want games to be like movies or fail to see the disconnect between gameplay and traditional storytelling(they are opposites). The reason silent protagonists are often necessary should be self evident if you look at games as games, not just another "story medium".
 
I don't disagree. I thought it was laughable to expect that I could insert myself into the shoes of Crono or the Persona 4 main.

I absolutely insert myself into the P4 Protag (Yu). That's part of what made the game so special.

But you can do RPGs with choices and voice acting. Mass Effect is the gold standard in that regard, and I inserted myself into that character to.

Or rather, it's more like a halfway point. I simultaneously recognize as it being this character but also being me.
 
Mute protagonists are generally weird in games where others are acting like they are talking. Non voiced protagonists however can be really beneficial, like in branching RPGs. In fact I'm all for those or limited VA, to keep costs down and script complexity and flexibility high.

More words does not a better script make.

It's startling to see people believe that voice acting somehow makes a script worse, when that's not even remotely close to the truth.

You know what makes a script worse? Terrible writers. Voice acting raises the required writing skill to pull off, but it doesn't somehow make everything objectively worse off.
 
even though there wasn't anything really wrong per se with isaacs character in dead space 2, I preferred how things were in the first game.

Indeed. I came to post about the Dead Space series. The first one maintains near perfect atmosphere and tension. By 3, Isaac won't quit whining about his god damn relationship. It's embarrassing and a chore to sit through. I like the setting and the action. Please let me play that without your shitty character drama.
 
It is a worse model though. I care about Geralt and Sheppard, I don't care about the main of Fallout whatever their name is. You keep repeating this nonsense over and over again. The character is bland regardless of choices to me, not sure why you're not understanding this? If you enjoy that type of content, that's fine.

What people are trying to tell you is that New Vegas, like Fallout 1 and 2, is a game based on old tabletop role playing game philosophy. The main characters of the Fallout games are always referred to in vague names (The Vault Dweller, Chosen One, Courier) because you're meant to "create" that character, and that means more than just what they wear or whether they're nice or mean. A backstory, an appearance, a personality, motivations, etc. You're not being asked to enjoy the story of Fallout Man, you're being asked what YOU (or a character purely from your own imagination) would do in any given situation.
 
Because there's a difference between saying "I can't get immersed if my main character isn't voiced" and saying that silent protagonists in RPGs are a backwards model that should have died in the PS2 era while failing to see the benefits they provide to other people.
It is a backwards model to me. They're dull and boring bar special cases. They go hand in hand. But they're different for you and that's fine.

EmCeeGramr said:
What people are trying to tell you is that New Vegas, like Fallout 1 and 2, is a game based on old tabletop role playing game philosophy. The main characters of the Fallout games are always referred to in vague names (The Vault Dweller, Chosen One, Courier) because you're meant to "create" that character. A backstory, an appearance, a personality, motivations, etc. You're not being asked to enjoy the story of Fallout Man, you're being asked what YOU (or a character purely from your own imagination) would do in any given situation.
This style of storytelling just isn't for me. I get the concept, I'm just not a fan of it. I would prefer that building the world and who you are to still be with a voiced character.
 
Most if not all of my favorite games have protagonists than don't talk or don't talk much.

First person games with a talking protagonist is particularly weird.
 
It is a backwards model to me. They're dull and boring bar special cases. They go hand in hand. But they're different for you and that's fine.

I don't see how New Vegas would be improved if the character was like "yeah I used to have a family but ruined it through my alcoholism and I'm atoning for the sins of my past." To me that's boring and derivative of other stories. I'd rather role play the character as whoever I like through the actions and words I decide on. If I want my character to be an alcoholic then I'll hoard and drink alcohol as I play.
 
I hated the voicing in FO4. But that was because the writing was a gigantic pile of crap.

On the other hand, I've loved voicing in other recent RPGs. The problem really is the writing and game design. That makes or breaks the choice of having a voice or silence. There's no one size fits all answer.
 
IMO a lot of times having a silent protagonist is a concious choice by developers to help with immersion and elicit empathy. If a lead character is too chatty and opinionated then you may disagree with their views/attitude or even just hate their whiny voice which can lessen the impact a story has on you emotionally.

By having you control a silent protagonist you're basically inhabiting an empty shell and free to fully embody that character. I'm not saying it's a practice I agree or disagree with buy can see why the choice is made.

I'd rather be playing as a nobody than controlling someone who I believe to be a douche.
 
Is the whole point to put the player in the roleof the mute?

Anyway, I honestly don't care and I'm surprised some people are so frustrated by the mute character.

For instance, I liked Fallout better when the protag didn't talk. Now I can't stand the way the guy talks in Fallout 4. I don't mind mute and in some cases love it as long as there are dialogue options.
 
With games like The Legend of Zelda and
maybe
Half-Life 3 and of course, Dishonored 2, will we continue to see mute protagonists fill the role of audience surrogate, or will they be replaced with the narrative-expanding properties of voice and personality?

I certainly hope the latter.
I've only finished The Knife of Dunwall DLC so far, but I already like Daud 10x times more than Corvo. :) I really really hope that Dishonored doesn't have mute Corvo (I'm not following the news on this game so maybe it's been already confirmed?).

dishonoredvoicedm3sfi.png
 
Yeah, like Dead Space 1 moving to 2.

"Let's make Isaac voiced this time, silent protag is so old school. Ok what will he say when he sees the necromorph?"
"How about 'Holy fucking shit'?"
"Great, great. And then when the bridge collapses?"
"How about a really long "fuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuck"?"
"LOVE IT!"

Dead Space 2 was fucking amazing and Clarke was one of the best protagonists of the seventh generation consoles.
 
Thinking back to games I love with silent protagonists, I'm not sure any of them would have been improved by adding a voiced protagonist. Like, I'm not exactly sure what P4 would have been if the MC talked instead of being silent. But at the same time, I'd be fine if future Persona games had a voiced protagonist.

Meanwhile, the silent progatonist in XBX was downright terrible.

It's just an execution thing.
 
I found myself completely floored by how immersion-breaking it is that when wrongly accused of the murder of the Empress, player character Corvo Attono says nothing in his defense.
And I often find it immersion breaking when the character who I am supposed to be playing as says things I wouldn't say, or have a weird voice.

I think both methods are valid and given the choice between a mute protagonist and an annoying protagonist, I would always rather have the mute protagonist.
 
It really depends on the game, but I think some characters just don't need to talk. Sometimes having the player character yell out things like "oh shit" and "oh god it's a [thing]" during gameplay can feel like shitty letsplay commentary.
 
I don't see how New Vegas would be improved if the character was like "yeah I used to have a family but ruined it through my alcoholism and I'm atoning for the sins of my past." To me that's boring and derivative of other stories. I'd rather role play the character as whoever I like through the actions and words I decide on. If I want my character to be an alcoholic then I'll hoard and drink alcohol as I play.

Ha, absoutely! I did this for New Vegas, took the odd swig from a vodka bottle. Pretended to be drunk. Made up a backstory (picked the Confirmed Bachelor perk, say no more). It's an open world sandbox game, you make your own fun. But in FO4 there are considerable barriers to this style of play. You can't roleplay as an ice cold sociopath (which given how he solves every quest would be appropriate) when every conversation option leads to him screaming "I'm going to kill you motherfucker where's my son".

But I am moving off topic. Certainly this has as much to do with FO4's bad dialogue choices as the voice.
 
Different strokes

Not every game needs to be fully VA
Not every game needs to be silent
Not every game needs to be an incredibly linear narrative

Personally I often feel disconnected from voiced protagonists I dislike and, consequently, I enjoy said games less. In other games, the lack of voicing is off putting.

There are solutions to both problems. In a silent protagonist game, for instance, stop using heavy handed literary dialog that produces full stops and interruptions in the flow of both gameplay and narrative (e.g. Skyward Sword, Hyrule Warriors). Half-Life 1 and 2 both do this perfectly.

Attempting to force one solution on all games (all games must have full VA for all characters always) will produce poor results.
 
Thinking back to games I love with silent protagonists, I'm not sure any of them would have been improved by adding a voiced protagonist. Like, I'm not exactly sure what P4 would have been if the MC talked instead of being silent. But at the same time, I'd be fine if future Persona games had a voiced protagonist.

If you play either of the spin-offs you'll get a flavour of it (Dance All Night or Arena). The MC is named and voiced. It's fine, but remembering back to my play through of P3, I don't think there was ever been a game where I was so totally able to insert myself into the protagonist role and I am sure that was down to his silence.
 
I normally really don't like mute protagonists because it tend to make the main character feel like they don't fit into the world properly, but I can think of a couple of games that I feel used it to their advantage.

In Persona 4 the main character not quite fitting in with the rest of the party feels very intentional and is backed up by his ability to change personas in battle/put on different faces in social situations. The dialogue choices feel less like roleplaying the character and more like a way to show the character approaching social interactions by dispassionately saying the thing people want to hear.

Undertale has a very blank slate main character, but it works in its favor by having things change based on how violently you play, so it's really good at allowing the player's interpretation of the main character to fit the events that are happening.
 
It is a worse model though. I care about Geralt and Sheppard, I don't care about the main of Fallout whatever their name is. You keep repeating this nonsense over and over again. The character is bland regardless of choices to me, not sure why you're not understanding this? If you enjoy that type of content, that's fine.

No it isnt. Its a model with different goals. You cant seem to make this logical connection. You cant have the Witcher set up like New Vegas but it goes the other way as well. Many of the strengths of the writing and script in NV cant happen with a character like Geralt.
 
I honestly think that half the fun of the P4 endurance run is that the MC is such a blank state that the GB team was able to insert their own weirdly endearing take onto him. The main character of Undertale has this advantage too.

The concept of a silent protagonist isn't without merit. However, I think the idea of having it solely to stick with tradition is a bad idea. Do it when it fits your needs, chuck it when it doesn't.

I'm really not into the concept of "immersion" when it comes to this. Just whatever fits the concept better. I don't need the protagonist to "be me". It's just that sometimes deliberately not giving a protagonist a voice works in its favor. Sometimes it doesn't: lookin' at you XBX.
 
Give Link a voice and 3/4 of the people are going to whine.

There are games that don't need a main character with voices.
Link is one character I think would be awesome with a voice.

Actually, all silent protags would be better if they talked. It's a stupid mechanic and always has been.
 
More words does not a better script make.

It's startling to see people believe that voice acting somehow makes a script worse, when that's not even remotely close to the truth.

You know what makes a script worse? Terrible writers. Voice acting raises the required writing skill to pull off, but it doesn't somehow make everything objectively worse off.

You dont even understand what I was saying. What I was talking about had nothing to do with how good the script was qualitatively.
 
This mightve been already mentioned, but Fallout's protagonists weren't silent. Quite the contrary. They simply weren't voiced.

Key difference, that.

Unvoiced protags in text heavy games are most def fine. Problem is when they are legit mute.
 
If you have voice acting it's bizarre to have a main character that doesn't speak. The only time I've seen it not be a negative is in fully first person games like Fallout 3/NV and Dishonored, otherwise you're just looking at some tool gesturing after you choose a dialogue option with a recent offender being XCX where your avatar felt totally out-of-place and unnecessary and honestly the game would have been better off with Elma as the MC.
 
Silent protagonists are the best, I love imagining a voice rather than the one voice you get given. Fallout 4 is a great example of why they should stay; having my character, a mother searching the desolate wasteland for her child, snarkily telling someone she "Lives for danger HOOOAAAHHH" just kills the atmosphere. Perhaps that's just the terrible writing but hey ho
 
The adoration and Alyx even falling in love with this dumb mute murder machine Gordon Freeman is a major reason I hated HL2, so yeah I'm obviously for seeing the trope continue to disappear.

I feel like 343's continued lending of a voice to the Master Chief has also made me enjoy the games more over Bungie's "you stay quiet until it's time for your cutscene!" approach.
 
I hope they continue to go away. Worst story telling mechanism in gaming

I agree. Why do people think that Japanese publishers only use Japanese VA's when localizing their games most of the time nowadays?

Because voice acting is costly, especially when dubbing for overseas.

Silent protagonists are usually good.
 
But you can also read Chrono Trigger as a very bold death sentence of the player-inserted mute protagonist, considering the game
kills him and unseats him as the main character of the story. Reviving Chrono, or even using Chrono, becomes entirely optional. Chrono Trigger deliberately tells the player that they are not the most important part of the story. They are not the chosen one. You can carry out the remainder of the game with the other, fuller, more distinct characters. To even greater effect, in at least a couple formations. If you do this, Chrono waits with the others with nothing more than an elepsis to contribute for the whole rest of the game. Chrono Trigger is a deconstruction of the player-inserted protagonist, not a case for one.
That's a really depressing analysis of the game. And I think it ignores the way other Party members interact with Crono.out of the main 6, all bar Robo are closest with Crono:

Lucca is Crono's childhood friend.
Marle is Crono's love interest.
Frog and Crono are sword bros.
Ayla respects Crono's strength.

Robo is the exception, with his strongest tie being to Lucca. He's not a stowaway on the adventure, he's the one everybody is drawn to.
 
The silent protagonist is something that I very much want to see explored more, not less.

I know you can write B-movie dialogue and splatter it over every scene; I can do that, devs can do that, the pizza guy down the street can do that. It's known. I'm far, far more interested in seeing work that explores areas that haven't been fully mapped yet.
Video games as a form probably support silent protagonists more strongly than most storytelling forms, so it's our obligation (and our opportunity!) to explore that space.

Show me what you can do, developers!
 
Top Bottom