Support NeoGAF

[EvilKatarn]

Agreed for the most part. Souls games do it well enough in my opinion because you're normally revealed just to be a tool and it's not like you end up saving the world in any of them. Very MGS2-esque. Geralt is fantastic because he's off on his own little adventure and while he gets tied into some grand stuff he's never out to save the world either. He always comes off as a gruff monster hunter and not a fucking demigod.

Mass Effect started going off the rails for me when Shepard had to go up against the reapers who were supposed this unwavering force of certain doom. But well, that series went off the rails in so many ways that it doesn't even matter.

I don't mind going out to save the world in a high-fantasy setting though. Bayonetta for example - no problem. FF and Persona characters with their god summoning powers make it less bullshit.

I know. I'm terrible.

I enjoyed it.

 

[Dimmle]

Stunning OP.

 

[reSpec Gaming]

Play rogue-likes

 

[SatelliteOfLove]

I look at the RPG genre a bit like fantasy novels. I want to be powerful. I want to go toe to toe with some mythical God dude who wants to destroy the world but I'm standing in his way. I want to call lighting from the skies, summon ancient dragons to reign meteors onto my foes. I want Epic. I want high fantasy. I like starting out as a teenager wielding a wooden sword who by the end has some earth shattering giant sword that can cut the tits off a God.

I want high fantasy and crazy ass action. Thats what I want. I don't want to roleplay as a bum ass trash collector who gains enough experience to tell off his boss one day.

There are a ton of games out there anyway that don't go the " chosen one " route.

OP, you would of loved Ultima Online. Best roleplaying experience of all time, because early on, before the casuals jumped in to PK, everyone roleplayed. People roleplaying Tailors or Blacksmiths or Miners or whatever. Not everyone jumped on horseback to ride off into the sunset in search for treasures guarded by Wyrms and shit.

MMOs suffer from this most greatly (not this BUT YOU DO BIG THINGS which has nothing to do with Mary/Gary Stu stuff). You get Special Cutscenes and Singular Origin Stories that...everyone else did (who you are interfered with interacting with, helping or relying upon to no surprise).

 

[badcrumble]

I agree totally with the OP, except it's neat that Mario is treated as a celebrity in Super Mario RPG.

 

[Ferr986]

Spoiler

Kinda. You're right that the natural outcome will be the age of dark, regardless of you linking the fire or not, but that's the point in Dark Souls, Gwyn's resisting the course of nature by extending the age of fire. You can think the Age of Dark would be worse, sure, but it's still the next natural step. Ancients -> Fire -> Dark. By linking the fire, all you do is postpone the inevitable, you extend the age of fire, but it wasn't supposed to be Ancients -> Fire -> Dark -> Fire -> Dark, this makes absolutely no sense, and it's a dumb retcon from Dark Souls II. For linking the fire to still be a thing in Dark II, the link the fire ending has to be the canon ending. This is the main reason why so many people dislike Dark Souls II's story as a direct sequel, it's dumb and misses the point. At least it'll serve a nice purpose in Dark Souls III, with the lords of cinder coming back to life.

Major Dark Souls spoilers.

Spoiler

I agree in what you said but I don't see how is a dumb retcon on DS2 story.

I mean, it's DS1 the one who introduce the choice of linking the fire again or let the dark age begin, and shows you how there's benefit for both options. Both options are presented with their own good and bad things.

Sure DS2 sounds like a re-tell of the same story but it actually shows you how useless is to fight against the curse with Vendrik and Aldia story for those that thing linking the fire was the best option. DS2 SOTFS just points out that whatever you do the end will be the same (basically what you said).

I feel like a lot of people just hated that because they had for sure that the darklord ending was the canon ending. (Mind you , there's a lot of wrong in DS2 lore, I disliked the daughters of Chaos origins for example, but the curse stuff isn't among them)

 

[GrantDaNasty]

I mean, FFXII has you play the game from the perspective of a relative inconsequential guy to the story that acts as a perfect fish out of water for the players to learn and understand the world we're playing but everyone bitched about it. It's emasculating to not be the center of the universe because videogames have conditioned us to have all this power fantasies.
It's a damn shame really.

Pretty good example actually.

I recently watched a friend play through all of it, and he quickly came to realize how inconsequential Vaan is to EVERYTHING happening in that game. His only link is his brother I believe, and even then it's a very weak one.

It was cool to see, a genuine breath of fresh air in a, as the OP said, world where we constantly make the Main Character of RPGs (this probably extends to most video games) this Christ-like figure.

 

[Gbraga]

Spoiler

I agree in what you said but I don't see how is a dumb retcon on DS2 story.

I mean, it's DS1 the one who introduce the choice of linking the fire again or let the dark age begin, and shows you how there's benefit for both options. Both options are presented with their own good and bad things.

Sure DS2 sounds like a re-tell of the same story but it actually shows you how useless is to fight against the curse with Vendrik and Aldia story for those that thing linking the fire was the best option. DS2 SOTFS just points out that whatever you do the end will be the same (basically what you said).

I feel like a lot of people just hated that because they had for sure that the darklord ending was the canon ending. (Mind you , there's a lot of wrong in DS2 lore, I disliked the daughters of Chaos origins for example, but the curse stuff isn't among them)

Spoiler

It's not as much about the Dark Lord being the canon ending as it is about it being the inevitable outcome. Ideally, a direct sequel would be during the age of dark, respecting both endings as perfectly valid, but for a sequel to be set in the age of fire, the link the fire ending is canon and the dark lord one is just filler. That's the only way it can make any sense. A lot of people seem to believe that what Dark II says is that no matter what you choose at the end of Dark Souls I, it's irrelevant and it'll lead you to Drangleic anyway, and even thought that was the reason for not having a choice in the end (which was later patched), but that completely contradicts Dark Souls I, and has to rewrite the game to be true. The Age of Fire doesn't come back once it's over, all you can do is keep extending it.

 

[JayWood2010]

You should ready The KingKiller Chronicles. So far Name of the Wind and The Wise Man's Fear is out. By far the best story ive seen/heard/read. Lionsgate actually just made a deal with the author to make a movie, show, and game out of it.

 

[pinkurocket]

Interestingly enough one of the main complaints of Xenoblade Chronicles X is how irrelevant you are as a main character. Compared to Xenoblade Chronicles with Shulk as a clear 'chosen one' persona. In X you are just a guy... or a girl... doing your thing with a crew. I don't know the full extent of the story since I haven't played it yet, but this is the impression I get. (Plz no spoilers if you know more than I do)

 

[Brawly Likes to Brawl]

A recent game where this really stuck out to me was Pokemon ORAS. Pokemon MCs being sue-ish is definitely nothing new since you're playing as a kid that wrecks his or her local competitive league within weeks of getting their starter. But ORAS kind of takes it to a new level of ridiculousness. Two points of contention I had were:

-

Spoiler

After you win the Balance Badge, and you're headed to Fortree City, the champion of the region just pops up and decides to sweep you away to some super special island where a fairly powerful legendary (Latios or Latias depending on your version) holding Mega-stone that allows it to reach an even more powerful state just.. joins you. You don't have to battle it, the game just decides that you deserve something this strong for no reason other than making it halfway through the main story. Granted, these two Pokemon are linked to a new feature called "Soaring", but that isn't even unlocked until the game is almost over so it makes no sense you had to get the legendary right then and there.

-

Spoiler

After you beat the main story mode, you do a special postgame story called the Delta Episode. Long story short, some new female character that we're supposed to like sabotages an attempt to save the planet from getting hit by a meteor, and the only reason an alternative solution was available was because the main character was in the right place at the right time, and just happened to be a suitable companion for another powerful legendary Pokemon and could achieve a new mega-evolution to save the world

 

[Ferr986]

Spoiler

It's not as much about the Dark Lord being the canon ending as it is about it being the inevitable outcome. Ideally, a direct sequel would be during the age of dark, respecting both endings as perfectly valid, but for a sequel to be set in the age of fire, the link the fire ending is canon and the dark lord one is just filler. That's the only way it can make any sense. A lot of people seem to believe that what Dark II says is that no matter what you choose at the end of Dark Souls I, it's irrelevant and it'll lead you to Drangleic anyway, and even thought that was the reason for not having a choice in the end (which was later patched), but that completely contradicts Dark Souls I, and has to rewrite the game to be true. The Age of Fire doesn't come back once it's over, all you can do is keep extending it.

Spoiler

Maybe I missed something but could someone rekindle the flame again even after the darklord ending in DS1? I don't remember DS1 saying that the fire couldn't be rekindled again after the the darklord rise but maybe I'm not remembering something. I feel like the fire is always there, it's part of the cycle of light and dark

It seems like DS3 plays exacty that, with you avoiding the fire to be rekindled.

 

[Atlas AS7-K]

OP might have had some good points, but the needlessly abrasive and angry style of writing turned me off.

Its video games, its a fantasy, not many people want to fantasize about a mundane life.

 

[KorrZ]

I agree. It's why I really liked the Witcher 3 and was pretty bored with DA: Inquisition. The whole you're the only one who can save the world plot line is getting pretty dull.

It was a huge breath of fresh air in TW3 to have a plot that was mainly about just a personal quest to find someone you care about, all of the other huge events going on are in the background and you don't really get to influence them individually.

It works well because Geralt isn't just some nobody, he's known and somewhat famous for his deeds but at the same time he's a mutant and an outcast. People spit at his feet and get up and leave from their tables as he comes around.

 

[QuantumZebra]

That and there are multiple endings in the game where you can go from zero to hero.

uhhhhhhhhhhhhh what?

None of the endings have you turn into a hero...

Spoiler

you either "wake up" (ie take the red pill) and continue to live a lie... you become Gerhman (which is nowhere near a hero)... or you become the Moon Presence, essentially a monster, albeit with powers.

Did you even play Bloodborne? I seriously can't fathom how people get the "Chosen One" complex out of it.


Now; Mass Effect - that is a prime example of what OP is referring to.

 

[Vital Tundra]

Yet these are some of the most played games among RPGs?

Come on guys, chosen one syndrome is a natural side effect of RPG storytelling.

Doesn't change the fact that I hate it. Ill support the chosen one, like in Oblivion, but being the "chosen one that saves the day" is super typical. Its not a natural side effect, its completely up to the developers.

 

[Gbraga]

Guys, spoiler tags...

 

[SpiceMelange]

I don't mind so much narrative wise, but gameplay wise being the center of the universe is game breaking for me. Oblivion and how everyone in the world becomes stronger as I level up just sapped out all immersion from me. I want to feel as part of the world, no be the center of it.

 

[SaganIsGOAT]

Oh chosen one, only you can do the dumb thing to save us! Oh please, oh Chosen One, oh Hero-Man, only you can punch the Dragon-Dolphin in the dick and light the Candle of Eternal Huge Dicks to save our Big Dick Party!

Oh my god 😂😂😂😂

 

[hidys]

This needs to be said more often.

Maybe not in this way but overall message is important.

 

[Icyflamez96]

What do you think about Adam Jensen in Human Revolution?

 

[Apathy]

Wow has had this problem now full on for the last two expansions (yet kinda started in wrath) and will continue with legion and is just really lazy writing to be honest.

In vanilla and BC you were just a band of adventurers that killed villains together in a raid. Wrath set into motion the fact that you all seemed had so many victories under your belts that you had to be the ones for that expansion to stop the ultimate evil (thankfully you weren't, you helped but didn't hit the killing blow, in fact you are dead when it happened). But since cata and then panda land and wod its been nothing but focused on the individual rather than the group and made it seem as you are the most special character in all of wow. Right now you are the commander if the whole army for your side and get treated as such when entering towns with guards honering you with salutes and whispering to each other how the commander has shown up. But that kinda rings hollow when the next person coming into town gets treated the same way, and then when my shitty farming alt gets treated the same even though it has never killed a raid boss during the time it should have to mattered. Legion will go even further by making players the class lead of their faction, but again it's stupid if every person is a class leader.

It's lazy, pandering writing that only the dumbest people could want to read. Not everyone in everything needs to be special.

 

[Sheriff_Battlesnake]

The

Spoiler

Bloodborne

example isn't fitting in my opinion. It very clearly specifies that so many have tried before you that the hub area is littered with graves. You are next in line, you just happen to be the one who succeeds.

But I agree. If my success is fate then it would happen regardless and my effort put into it was pointless. It cheapens the conclusion when it was predestined.

 

[nded]

What do you think about Adam Jensen in Human Revolution?

I guess he looks edgy at first glance, but at his core he's basically a standard dude who gets caught up in a conspiracy orchestrated by much more powerful people, and his endgame isn't so much saving the world but figuring out which side he's on in an ideological conflict.

The real "chosen one" would probably be JC Denton, but he doesn't quite reach Mary Sue status until Invisible War.

 

[kamineko]

Play rogue-likes

Great advice. Nothing like a few hours of ADOM to make you feel like a big nobody

 

[Lanrutcon]

Yet these are some of the most played games among RPGs?

Come on guys, chosen one syndrome is a natural side effect of RPG storytelling.

Since when is popularity a sign of quality? Especially in this industry.

 

[Tunahead]

Yeah Chosen One stuff is generally terrible. Why is the entire universe in danger? And why can this typically be resolved by me killing one guy? How did the universe ever survive this long if one dude can destroy it all by hisself? How does anyone in this universe sleep at night when their continued existence is dependent on the complete absence of people who are total dickfaces? And why isn't anyone else doing anything about this apocalyptic threat? Is this universe so shit and awful that no one else cares?

And the answer to all these questions is, of course, "According to our marketing research, the universe is where our core demographic keeps their stuff, so they'll probably be on board with it being the thing they're saving."

But the sex stuff is particularly dire. At least with universe saving, the stuff you're doing is generally so far outside the realm of reality that even tiny babies will realize that this kind of stuff has nothing to do with reality. But meanwhile in the sinister land of Bioware games, the protagonist is applying their unique brand of sinister exceptionalism to sex, which is a thing I've heard sometimes happens to actual human beings. And when a giant cave troll is congratulating you for winning a relationship, good job man, most people and some demigods straight up perish because of my enormous girth, you truly are the best at doing a sex to me, well, that's not good for anybody. Ugh.

 

[Elandyll]

I agree. It's why I really liked the Witcher 3 and was pretty bored with DA: Inquisition. The whole you're the only one who can save the world plot line is getting pretty dull.

It was a huge breath of fresh air in TW3 to have a plot that was mainly about just a personal quest to find someone you care about, all of the other huge events going on are in the background and you don't really get to influence them individually.

It works well because Geralt isn't just some nobody, he's known and somewhat famous for his deeds but at the same time he's a mutant and an outcast. People spit at his feet and get up and leave from their tables as he comes around.

Except that this example falls flat on its face really.

In DAI the plot makes it clear that

Spoiler

it could have been anybody, and it was just a matter of luck/ bad luck to become the Herald. It then is used to explore the theme of faith in a savior.
Geralt, as was said before, is "special" from the very beginning, and holds a large place (even if not named in it) in an end of the world prophecy.

You're free to prefer W3 to DAI really, but the example given is just nonsense imo.

 

[Psychoward]

OP have you played DAI yet?

That's basically all there is to the player character. Shepard was at least awesome and not bland.

Did you just not pay attention to the story at all or

 

[nkarafo]

I know what you mean OP but i'm already an average normal guy in real life. My only chance to be a special snowflake who saves the world is in videogames.

Although, i admit that so far i prefer the Gerald of Rivia type of hero.

 

[Uthred]

I agree that its over-used, though I'd suggest that the actual problem is not so much the overuse as the continually poor use.

 

[Crzy1]

Such a Lovecraftian idea.

I loved this ins Call of Cthulhu: The Dark Corners of the Earth, too.

Is The Secret World any good?

I enjoyed it. I'd say if you can find it for fairly cheap just to play through the main mission it's worth it. It's a little too grindy in the end for me to stick with it anymore, but definitely unique in it's setting and premise.

That being said, your character does make a difference and does change the world by the end of things and is VERY special compared to the average Joe.

I do like create-a-character games that give you freedom to make what you want and then go out to save the world, but I think that the crutch of "you're special" that most games use could do for a rest at this point.

Probably my favorite character is the courier in Fallout New Vegas. You're not anyone special, you were just a victim of circumstance and are out for revenge, or you can just decide revenge isn't worth it and wander the New Vegas wastes killing bandits or doing whatever else you want. It's set up as a revenge tale, but you don't actually have to seek revenge if you don't want to. You aren't out to save the world and you can have as much or as little bearing on the events unfolding as you want. I kind of wish there was a timer where the story would progress without you and there was a random chance that any of the vying factions would seize power without your help, but perhaps in the future I can see something like that.

 

[orthodoxy1095]

Yet these are some of the most played games among RPGs?

Come on guys, chosen one syndrome is a natural side effect of RPG storytelling.

Not really. It's an issue particular endemic in video game RPGs. It has become an extremely lazy cliche/trope that's relied on to make players feel extremely special. Traditional tabletop RPGs can easily avoid this, and I can say that within my own RPG group, we've avoided it pretty well. In fact, we've only ever had one remotely "Chosen One" story (it was me). It was moderated by the fact that I was "Chosen" to be part of the destruction of the world or something, but I wasn't given any noticeably better powers, equipment or plot armor.

In videogames. The type of campaigns most modern RPGs deal in are derided as "Monty Haul" campaigns in pen and paper. It isn't natural, it's a lazy way to manufacture excitement without being clever.

And even in games. Many of the classics are specifically not chosen one games, even if those make up the bulk of the genre. Planescape: Torment is literally about learning the truth about your self. Wizardry is about professional adventurers being roped into a dispute between two psychotic magicians. Ultima is about specifically subverting chosen one tropes, by putting the player through various philosophical challenges including some where they achieve "chosen one status" in one game, then get to know and help a race that saw your precious exploits as evil.

Big difference between "cliche" and "natural".

Absolutely correct.

I agree that its over-used, though I'd suggest that the actual problem is not so much the overuse as the continually poor use.

This is true as well. You can write "chosen one" stories, but they need to be well written. Additionally, you can aid the writing by not making them follow the same kind of "Chosen" story and vary the "Chosen" stuff in different aspects. Maybe you're the "Chosen" of a village or region, rather than the entire damn world. Maybe it's a Chosen Four. A Chosen Duo (twins even?). Maybe you're protecting/escorting the Chosen. Maybe you're the Chosen but then you find out you're not really and have to deal with the ramifications of having your "title" stripped. There's all kinds of ways to add some novelty to the stories, and then hopefully injecting some good writing into it too!

 

[blueteainfusion]

Except that this example falls flat on its face really.

In DAI the plot makes it clear that

Spoiler

it could have been anybody, and it was just a matter of luck/ bad luck to become the Herald. It then is used to explore the theme of faith in a savior.
Geralt, as was said before, is "special" from the very beginning, and holds a large place (even if not named in it) in an end of the world prophecy.

You're free to prefer W3 to DAI really, but the example given is just nonsense imo.

I honestly have no idea how so many people can misinterpret Geralt's role in the story. The fact that he is not The Chosen one is the whole point of it. It's even spelled out

Spoiler

in the finale by the actual Chosen One

. Does he have his role, even important one at that? Of course he does. But being relevant in the large scale doesn't change the fact that there are a lot of people around him who have as much, if not more, impact on the world. Going by that logic, Yennefer could be called The Chosen One too! So could Avallac'h - and he probably is, just not from the player's perspective. It's the difference between being a playable character and an NPC. But if you treat the story as, well, a story, you'll see that Geralt is just one of the many cogs in the machine, and it's absolutely intentional. The Witcher is filled with "special snowflakes", people bound by destinies and whatnot - and they all have influence on the fate of their universe.

As to Geralt's being "the male power fantasy", I won't argue too much that he isn't. It's not mutually exclusive to him having an interesting (IMO) personality, independently of player's choices. I will confess that I'm actually glad that CDPR toned down his whiny tendencies that are absolutely present in the books - it wouldn't work in the game and would only come out as cliched manpain. The character has been through some tough shit in the novels and I appreciate that he seems more confident and well-adjusted now. I'd like to think that he finally grew up.

I have problems with the plotting and characterization in these games, but it's not Geralt that bothers me in this case. It's not a topic for here and now, though.

 

[ShemhazaiX]

This is why I actually really liked Dragon Age 2 until the weird as fuck ending. You were just a person in the wrong place at the right time and everything in the story was contained within Kirkwall and any world changing events happened out of your sphere of influence.

 

[Coriolanus]

The STALKER games are pretty good about letting you feel like an anonymous scavenger.

Particularly how you can run into Strelok in the third game and he's just some dude. Particularly good at surviving, yes, but easily killed, just like everybody else.

 

[Laughing Banana]

This is going to sound extremely contrary, but FF-Type0. Most of the missions have you playing as a part of a larger battle, though yes you're the spear a lot of the time. This sticks out in the final dungeon, though. Y

Spoiler

ou get the ever loving shit beaten out of you by the final boss when you're assuming you'll win the same way as every other JRPG ever. You're given a gimmick ability based on the group's signature talent to eventually win, and even then not via traditional battle. And then everyone dies. There's even an alternate ending where, despite turning to the Dark Side to try to be awesome and save your friends, you still get slaughtered. There's no way to actually "win".

.

JUST FANTASTIC.

No fucking spoiler tag at all in your post and it clearly state the fate of the ending and EVEN the goddamn ALTERNATE ending for all to fucking see. I mean, I know the thread title contains SPOILERS but other people at least are considerate enough to still mark their spoilers since we dd indeed talk about numerous games in here, not just a single one.

I am currently playing this FF Type 0 HD on PS4 BTW, so thanks so much for your incredible ability to tag spoilers properly. Really. Thank you so much.

 

[Overside]

Great advice. Nothing like a few hours of ADOM to make you feel like a big nobody

Do one better than this, and go dwarf fortress.

Where you can observe the entire history of existance all the way up to the events of your worthless waste of oxygen, who accomplished nothing, and died, inconsequentially, and affected nothing in the world.

On the flip side, if you ever do manage to survive long enough to become powerful, flipping through the pages of history to your players chapter, and seeing the effects he did have is pretty amazing.

I started a 700 year war that ended in the extinction of an entire race once on accident.

Really didn't think anyone would mind me killing that chicken.

 

[diaspora]

In dragon age 1 and inquisition they give you a status (warden and inquisitor) from pretty much the beginning that gives you the authority to do whatever you want and that guarantees that everyone will listen to what you say, even the highest of the social ladder or the lowest that shouldn't give a shit. The random person thing is really only the excuse to allow a blank slate character.

In both games it's also pretty immediately clear that you are the only one that can save the world and all events happening in the world are centered around you (or more precisely, your position as the warden/inquisitor).

Mass Effect is the same, though the spectre stuff was pretty well handled in 1. It's in 2 and 3 where it quickly became obvious you were literally space jesus, whatever you wanted to happen, happened.

I want the hero to have agency but i also want the world to a) not revolve around only me, the protagonist, and b) i want the gameworld to push back. Give me choices but don't let me just win because i made a descision.

Actually, you're not the chosen one in DAO, they make it clear in game that you don't actually need to do anything and that if you fail, the task would simply fall to the other international warden divisions. Incidentally, being named Inquisitor is part of the point, the characters in the game and the world interprets the botched magic on your hand as being divine- the game gives you the agency to reject divinity or capitalize on it and manipulate the masses.

Also, for DAO, it's pointed out both in game and in subsequent games, that the Blight you faced was really mild compared to other ones- to the point where people elsewhere don't believe it happened at all.

 

[kagamin]

Does Monster Hunter count?

 

[PtM]

Does Monster Hunter count?

But you are the chosen hunter in 3…

Spoiler

since you're the only one around

.

 

[Ceadeus]

Try playing sandbox rpg.

I mean, it is not like there was no game with a bland hero.

But rpg sure do have repetitive stories. Behind the. Character.

 

[kagamin]

But you are the chosen hunter in 3…

Spoiler

since you're the only one around

.

"Let's send a random hunter with no experience to this random village!"

 

[NCR Redslayer]

But you are the chosen hunter in 3…

Spoiler

since you're the only one around

.

But then you head into loc lac(online) and you see hunters who have hunted far greater monsters than you have.

 

[Pinko Marx]

OP might have had some good points, but the needlessly abrasive and angry style of writing turned me off.

Its video games, its a fantasy, not many people want to fantasize about a mundane life.

Typical lazy Internet argument. If someone isn't for one thing, they must be championing for the EXTREME OPPOSITE. there is a middle ground between chosen jesus and lowly peasant and it's wide and varied.

 

[IdreamofHIME]

People like feeling important in games, because in real life they are probably invisible. Being the chosen Jesus of the new world with a treetrunk dick makes up for your boss not knowing your name in real life.

Typical lazy Internet argument. If someone isn't for one thing, they must be championing for the EXTREME OPPOSITE. there is a middle ground between chosen jesus and lowly peasant and it's wide and varied.

and there is a middle ground, just look at the 5 pages of examples. Picking out the examples where it happens is just skweing the argument.

 

[purdobol]

Nah i can live with being the chosen hero that will save the world from great danger nobody else is aware of.
What annoys me the most with RPGs is that 80% of it is fantasy. Elves, dwarfs, dragons bullshit. The setting that has easiest way out of anything potentially problematic to explain. In fantasy you just say "because magic" and you can get away with everything. Which leads to lazy writing most of the time. "Some sorcerer will summon great evil that threatens the world...stop it from happening...oh its too late...fight the great evil".
Would like to see more themes in that genre. Western RPG with lone hero a'la Lucky Luke or Ancient Rome themed game filed with shady politics and conspiracy. So much potential out there beside this fantasy crap.

 

[Adaren]

This was the worst thing about Skyrim. Morrowind also made your character special, but it knew when to deemphasize it to let you blend into the world. Skyrim shoves it down your throat at every turn.

 

[Jinkies]

I don't like escapism fantasies, but I do like stories with high stakes and large scale events. If a Jesus character is involved in that, it doesn't bother me as long as the fundamental components of the plot are captivating.

That said, not all RPGs need to have a distinct player avatar, which is lost on a lot of Western developers. Many RPGs have an ensemble cast–some have no cast. However, these can be more challenging to write and do not always pay off.

The worst plot device for me is when the ultimate weapon against an antagonist is the power of friendship and/or the human spirit. I adore FFVI, but that element was included and not my cup of tea. It seemed to be an especially common trope in various media of the 80s/90s, but to me isn't that interesting.

 

[12BoM]

Sounds like somebodies got a small dick