One trope that bothers me is when the massacaring hero suddenly feels a moral conflict about killing the final villain. Think of the Uncharted Games. The defeated villain will taunt Drake, and tell him that he doesn't have it in him to finish him off. He's just not a killer. Um, there are 500 corpses, all felled by Drake, who would say otherwise. Yet, Drake always screws up his face and seems deeply troubled by the terrible choice before him. Sorry Drake, that ship sailed about 30 seconds into the prologue.
@Writer Brandon McNulty On second thought, I think you sort of covered this one in your trope about the unstoppable hero becoming quite stoppable in a cutscene. The "hero suddenly developing a moral compass in a cutscene" trope is probably a cousin to that one. Both inject an inconsistency into the protagonist to manufacture drama.
Worst offender is Assassin's Creed 2, SO MANY PEOPLE DIED because of Rodrigo Borgia and Ezio finally confronts him, punches him down, and... Decides against killing. Not any time before or after the Assassin mass slaughtering people left and right suddenly decides to not kill the main villain, guess because Ubisoft marketing department decided that having you kill Pope would be almost as bad for PR as... Shudders... Playable women. But there's a worse equivalent in movies. Hero. A great film, but it was made after China annexed Hong Kong, which meant CCP was running the show and despite the protagonist's best friends literally giving their Iives so he can gain trust of the Emperor by killing them, randomly decides to just not kill Win Shi Huang-Di. Because the Chinese Communist party forbids showing mass murdering dictators in a bad light. So he kills the Hero but is thankful for him being a good proletariat or something.
That one has made me laugh since Sunset Riders! After you defeat Chief Scalpem his sister begs you not to shoot him because "He's only following orders"... So he's the one bad guy who gets mercy. But what about the hundreds of other mooks you killed? Surely they were all following orders too!
Movies do this too. The hero isn't allowed to kill the villain unless the villain does one last dastardly attempt to kill the hero. It's so dumb. The TV show Firefly was refreshing in that they would just kill a bad guy if it was the reasonable thing to do.
I hate when a character is super strong when fighting against you but is super weak when fighting with you. They did that with Quiet in MGSV and it was a major buzz kill.
@@magnomendes7373 Katt has the highest agility in the game, so I always give her the Chop Chop skill, which completely ignores enemy defense. She usually crits fairly often, too, so she's a regular in my party, along with Bleu and Bow.
@@magnomendes7373 I still say Katt is more useful than you give her credit for. If you're looking for a game that gives you OP characters after you fight them, Radiata Stories is your alpha and omega, especially with some of the late-gamers. The original Valkyrie Profile is the opposite: weak bosses who join you become very powerful!
The oposite of the unstoppable hero. When you strugle in the game, with limiting mechanichs, and then a cutscene comes and the character starts doing shit you wish you could during playtime. (examples FFVII remake, Cloud making super jumps, Metal Gear solid 3, Snake taking out Ocelot´s men in an instant, face to face)
I remember playing Lego Star Wars as a kid and wishing that the player-characters could jump like the bosses or dropped-out npcs who casually leap over massive gaps.
2 game cliches i hate. 1 winning the fight then losing in the cutscene right after. 2 the big bad letting you live at the beginning of the game cause you're not a threat.
The only times I disagree is if your going to prison in the beginning and are saved by either yourself or a full on assault on the prison, or your the courier
Idk if I'd say I HATE it. This kinda thing more makes me laugh and breaks immersion. But... When a game's story is 100% unchangeable, but they let you do things in gameplay to contradict the story. Last of Us 1, for instance. There is a section of the game where you are escaping from a bunch of men, and main character Joel gets injured. You find out later that those men are from a local group of cannibals, and the leader of the cannibals is very upset at Joel for killing so many of his people. While replaying the game, I tried to escape the place without killing anybody. Basically just running for my life anytime one of them encountered me. And I did pretty good, I managed to avoiding killing all but one guy. And I'm thinking there's no way the guy can be mad about losing only one of his men. But cannibal leader's scripted dialogue played out exactly the same, saying "I sent a group of men out to look for food, and only a few came back" and "the others were slaughtered by a crazy man travelling with a little girl". And I'm just laughing like, "Must've been some other crazy man with a little girl, cause it sure as hell wasn't me lol"
Great point. Some game stories change if you take the pacific route (MGS3 and Undertale come to mind), but you're right about others that follow the script regardless of the actions taken. Not sure if you've played Spec Ops: The Line (its story often gets praised), but that one obligates you to do horrible things for the sake of the script. The story forces you to go in a certain direction, and then it judges you for your "choices." It's actually a pretty good story, but it could've been executed a lot better.
I really hate that, even if you don't. I guess I was spoiled by Deus Ex, or at least the parts that actually acknowledged when you shot or just subdued all of the enemies in an area.
@@WriterBrandonMcNulty Hi Brandon. Regarding Spec Ops, I've heard this criticism before and wanted to understand it better as I didn't have it myself when I played. What makes you interpret the game as judging us (the player) for our choices, and not criticizing Walker instead for his? Walker is fully voiced and has his own character so it was pretty easy for me to understand that Walker's actions led to many of the tragedies that occurred, it wasn't anything the player did. Was there something you think would've hammered it in better?
@@zongopbongo It's because the game breaks the fourth wall and asks you questions like, "Are you having fun yet?" or things like that, implying that you're doing horrible things, or at least enabling these horrible things to happen (by playing the game). I personally do NOT have a problem with this because I don't actually believe anything wrong is happening: It's just a game. I think some people take it personally though. "Hey, this game isn't giving me the option to NOT do this, so why am I being blamed?" I personally believe this misses the point. The point is that you DID have an option regardless: Don't play the game. You could then have counter-criticisms, e.g., "So you made this game to not make money?" but the further into the weeds we go the farther we get from the point, a point that I think we can appreciate without feeling personally castigated.
honestly, this seem too much to ask. Although, some games do affect dialogues. There will come a point that it wont. Impossible to program all possible dialogue on a 30+ hour game. Unless its very linear
My first mmo cliché is the tedious harvest quest. "Go into the forest, kill beavers, bring me 150 tails." Second is the unearned Chosen One-ness. I don't mind power fantasy or big destiny per se, but it really disappoints me when all your character has to do is show up and one little dungeon run later your halfway to guildmaster.
Chosen one stories are done badly so, so often. Why are they the chosen one? How do people know this? Some coincidence? If you are a level 1 character and already the chosen one, wouldn't it benefit the super powerful, all knowing, world threatening force of evil to come with a full hoard of shock troops while you are collecting apples or rat tails or whatever that quest is in order to wipe you out? And then once it is confirmed that you are the champion of the world, defender of all the things, why do high level areas still expect you to collect rhinosaurus tusks, or whatever, in order to get anyone in the town to give you the time of day? Shouldn't the chosen one be in a position of leadership by then, having peons collect the tusks? If you really are the chosen one, that should CHANGE your position in life because people are going to start deferring to you, following you or expecting things from you. I want to see the character suffer or work through repercussions of everyone thinking they are 'the chosen one'. But that rarely happens. Just a prompt for you to feel, "Ah, I'm the one special person who must go and get the key to the lock that will open the wand that powers the sword that will bring down the house that Jack built. Let's go!"
How about whenever you meet new people the group just magically decide you should be the leader? Sure, all you need to start leading people is show up!
@@ArcaneWolf9 It's especially hilarious in MMOs. "You're the chosen one!" ... just like everyone else. "The saviour of Blakthan!" ... the 389th today. "You saved the village!" ... actually, you rescued three people and left all the others to their fate. After all, you have to leave someone to rescue for the other Chosen Ones, eh? :D "How could you do that?" ... while literally having no choice whatsoever about what you do in a quest beyond not doing the quest in the first place (which often means you're stuck).
Surprised. But love the insight you can provide for this medium! My most hated cliche is when the death of side characters is emotionally processed in about two lines of dialogue before the heroes go on and do whatever their big mission is. (While in the same universe the death of a loved one can be the catalyst for a whole revenge journey for the villain.)
Yeah, this frequently pops up in RPGs and adventure games. It's tricky to find the right balance between the appropriate emotion and plot pacing (especially if the plot is really rolling)
@@WriterBrandonMcNulty Oh, good point! Striking the right balance must be difficult. As a story-enjoyer, I just wish emotive storytelling shouldn't be cut off awkwardly in favour of game progression. :'- ) But creative writing must be hard if there's an entire production team sitting in the back.
Its also possible, that after murdering hundreds of beings with a blade in a close range, eye to eye, you will become a emotionless zombie like in the first world war. Whats the one more body on a pile :D
When the villain wants you dead as their main ojective... only for them to not kill you when they got the chance. When the final boss fight happens with that villain, I be like: "what, so NOW you wanna kill me, and not before?? LMAO YOU HAD THE CHANCE EARLIER"! Breaks the immersion and undermines the villain A LOT!
I understand what you mean about the silent protagonist, but in some cases, I believe the silent protagonist is the best choice, specifically for games that have the creation of your own unique character as the main draw, like New Vegas. Having a voice or voice lines that might contradict the character you want to play as would be frustrating which is one of many reasons why a lot of people didn't like Fallout 4s voiced dialogue. Still a great video though! I would love to see more video game related videos.
Thanks! And that's a fair take on silent protagonists. Obviously I would prefer to have a pre-made, fleshed-out protagonist, but silence can make a create-your-own-character situation more immersive. I haven't played Fallout 4, but I've heard the complaints you mentioned. I wonder if better dialogue/VAing would've fixed the issue or not? The silent protag in Fallout 3 bothered me, especially during the main quest with the dad. In New Vegas, it didn't bother me as much (for whatever reason).
I think silent protagonists are a lot like prologues. You can get away with them if you do them well, and have reasons to have them be silent. Too many games just make their protagonists silent by default, which always ends up being boring.
I thought Dead Space benefited from a silent protagonist. The character loses his sanity as the game progresses, and it adds to the game's unsettling atmosphere that you don't trust your protagonist's own perception. The remake gave him a voice, and I think I preferred the silent portrayal from the original.
@@WriterBrandonMcNulty I think the silent courrier in New Vegas works because the dialogues themselves are very well written, to the point that I can see myself saying those lines so the voice in my head just fill in the gap itself. It felt like I was the courrier and was having all those conversations with the NPC.
Yes, the older Fallout Protags weren't silent, there was just to much options to make them voiced especially for male and female characters. There is a difference between fully voicing a game and having multiple choice dialog. The problem in Fallout 4 was not that the protagonist was voiced, but that the options suffered from it, the dialog was bad and it took from the Choices you could make in the previous games.
tbf telltale games probably only sold because of their story and not their pseudo choices, but then anyone could view the story on the internet to experience it and therefore there is no point in buying the game and that is probably why their company went bankrupt... i feel really bad for them because their games had some of the best stories i have experienced, the ending of the walking dead legit got to me and even though you didnt have any real choices... playing batman the telltale series and batman the enemy within legit made me feel that these things mattered a lot and I actually felt like the protagonist instead of just a passive observer... same with minecraft story mode... RIP telltale... you will always be in my heart...
Silent protagonists can work very well in some games. Portal and portal 2 have some really funny dialogue sequences that are based around the protagonist being mute.
Mario never seemed like he needed dialogue, and it may have been a cartridge space issue for Super Mario 64 to only have little catchphrases (which have just stuck around ever since)
When it comes to Quest, I cannot stand that if a little girl NPC has a quest for you, it will always be something along the lines of "I lost my dolly. Please find it for me!"
I couldn't agree more. You're in full heavy plate armour, drenched with the blood of nightmarish monsters, but the little girl comes to you asking about her dolly and you let the monsters run rampage while looking for a toy.
This is a change of pace, I hope to see more videos like this! I think you're #5 is my #1 lol. I've always hated how unstoppable characters are halted in a cutscenes by events that wouldn't harm them in gameplay. The opposite is also true. Where a cutscene showcases a character's ability that is otherwise not possible in gameplay. I think the latter is actually more common, and its a super pet peeve of mine. Makes me think the character is only extremely strong when the story requires them to be.
Thrilled you enjoyed it! I've wanted to make this video for a while, but I hesitated because I didn't know how my audience would respond to a gaming-focused writing video. Lately I've been feeling burned out from doing "how to" videos, so I thought I'd allow myself to have a little fun. And great point about this: "The opposite is also true. Where a cutscene showcases a character's ability that is otherwise not possible in gameplay. I think the latter is actually more common, and its a super pet peeve of mine. Makes me think the character is only extremely strong when the story requires them to be." YES. I almost included this cliche, but I thought it was too similar to #5. Metal Gear Solid: The Twin Snakes is guilty of this, where you have Snake jumping off missiles in the cutscenes, but he can't even jump at all during actual gameplay. Devil May Cry also comes to mind with this.
@@WriterBrandonMcNulty "Spectacle fighters" in general tend to fall prey to this "reverse #5" trope. Devil May Cry, Bayonetta, Metal Gear Rising: Revengeance, Vanquish, etc. All the protagonists do sick stuff in cutscenes while you're left wondering where the button to do that is on your controller.
I once played an RPG where I was over-leveled for the final boss. I was wrecking his ass, I one-shotted him to half health and a cutscene plays and he says "HAHAHA YOU ARE SO WEAK. YOU ARE DELUSIONAL IF YOU THINK YOU CAN BEAT ME". I finished him off with one blow.
@@Hedron1027 Yes, you can do sick stuff, but not the over the top things they do in cutscenes. I remember Raiden in Revengeance going bananas in the cutscenes, suplexing metal gears and stuff.
When there is supposed to be a time sensitive moment in the main quest but the gameplay reflects no sense of urgency, encouraging you to explore, grind or even take on trivial side quests.
Mass Effect 2 does a great job with this SPOILERS AHEAD when the crew gets captured, the squadmates say that they should save the crew as soon as possible and they’re right because if you decide to do more than two missions beforehand then the entire crew dies
I don't have a problem with this, I play really really slow. A 60-hour game would be 120 hours for me. I hated games that had a timer on me, especially open-world RPGs where I just want to take my time and explore.
When the Lead hero is suddenly incapacitated be the thought of loosing a dear close ally and almost can’t carry on even though he wades through the corpses of his enemies for nearly the entire game.
You know what game actually urks me with the silent protagonist? The old call of duty modern warfare trilogy! As much as I love the story, whenever you played as a specific character they suddenly go completely mute or were completely mute from the start. Think about Soap, who were introduced to in Cod 4. He's silent until Mw2, where he takes the role of captain and you're no longer in control of him. He's very talkative, until one of the later missions where you begin playing as him and all of a sudden he doesn't speak, lol. Same thing with characters like Yuri in Mw3, really takes me outta the story for a little
It frustrates me when a character is super powerful in cutscenes but mediocre in gameplay. An example is Jack in Mass Effect 2. When you meet her she's annihilating giant mechs that have multiple health bars and are difficult opponents in gameplay, but when she joins your squad she's one of the most useless squadmates in the game.
As a writer (and someone who doesn’t like talking aloud), I find the “silent protagonists only exist as self-inserts” argument to be in bad taste. It gives off the idea that verbal speech (and only frequent verbal speech) is what gives a person character. There are indeed people who only speak when they feel that they have to (like dialogue options). And some characters simply choose to show their personality through their actions, or how they dress, or how they decorate their home. Judging a character simply by speech feels like an unnecessary limit to a person’s experience. And sometimes… a character is better off without voiced lines. Look at the Zelda cartoon or CDI games; Link speaking would be cursed at best.
I really dislike when games stories move the goalpost too much. Like the objective will start out as 'go to blank city major story stuff is going to happen there'. But then there a an unopenable gate or something in the way and you have to go on a wild tangent to a side dungeon to get the key for the gate.
Ahhh, this reminds me of Resident Evil games where you need a specific key to open a specific door... My question is, why can't I just use my character's shotgun to blast the doorknob? Maybe if ammo is super-scarce I can decide whether I want to find the key or spend precious ammo. That would make things more interesting. Also, with those gates you mentioned... Sometimes they appear short enough for the characters to jump/climb over but of course the game never lets you attempt the most obvious solution.
If there is a "unstopable hero" and "silent peotagonist" i can get behind, is the Doom Slayer, you are unstopable during gamrplay, and everyone shit bricks in your presence during cutscenes, and he is also, not completely "silent" you can pretty much understand whar he is saying or expresing for his mannerism
Ah yes, you did it at last. :) I'll just quickly point out that some of these can apply to other art forms too. For example, the one about having too many McGuffins could come up in books, movies, tv series, etc. There's probably a lot of self-published fantasy adventure ebooks with too many McGuffins to keep track of. And the self-insert protagonist is something I've seen people complain about in other art forms too. Namely, there's an ongoing debate over whether it's necessary to make main characters relatable. A lot of book publishers say you have to have a relatable protagonist, but tons of people disagree with that because relatable protagonists are usually boring. Anyway, love the video, and I'm glad to see it getting a positive reception. :)
Thanks! And great points about these spilling into other mediums. Also, it seems UA-cam finally stopped auto-filtering your comments as spam--it's about time!
Hard agree with you on the silent protagonists. And the worst part about Link is: they did a FANTASTIC version of him in Skyward Sword. While he was still silent, not only did he have a ton more options for dialogue, but he was severely more expressive in cutscenes. There is even a character development in his emotions as you go through the game, from a meek childhood friend who always has to be saved to a confident hero tearing through hell to get your girl back. In this case, some of his silence can speak volumes. So I was really disappointed that they just kind of made Link boring and uninteresting again in BotW and TotK. I think my most hated story cliche is the same in videogame as it is in other medium: the love triangle. I've seen very few love triangles that are actually interesting (and by 'very few' I mean once), and most of the time it's added in the middle of the story to create cheap drama between the main couple. Not at ANY point do you believe these characters will end up with literally anybody else so this entire third wheel entering adds nothing but padding to a plot. If there are actually other stories out there with good love triangles, I'd love to know that they exist beyond the one I know, but highly doubtful. EDIT: Also, while we're on the topic, I'd love to see another video on this subject, but on videogame tropes that you LOVE instead. I'd love to know what cliches you can do exclusively in videogames that are great examples of the medium.
Yeah, I LOTHE love triangles.... If I was writing a story where more than one character loves a single one. I'd just rather they poly it up. It's not traditional, but for some characters. It just works. But... the way most people write the triangles. It makes everyone involved devolve into annoying assholes. And frankly... I just am NOT about the drama....
I’ll be honest, I actually really like the silent protagonist trope. I don’t think every protagonist should have lots of dialog, and it does work better for characters like Mario and Link to be silent instead of speaking full sentences.
I actually released a video recently addressing the sleugh of complaints that fallout 4 gets because it actually has a voiced character with a backstory. the backstory isn't great, but simply replacing the protagonist with a voiceless blank slate doesn't help the story when it's based on the premise of a person searching for their kidnapped son. it was not well received...
Link has a reason in BOTW to not talk. In Zelda's diary, she says that Link talked to her once, and said that he doesn't talk because with so many eyes on him, and so much pressure to save Hyrule from evil, he took a vow of silence.
I still wish the game actually explored it more. Link may not have to talk, but they could have at least let him emote or show his emotions through facial expressions, which would hint to his true feelings during a situation. But instead Link is just a face plate that only changes either when he’s angry or when he’s cooking food. It still felt like a missed opportunity to me.
While I do get the point about Ocarina Of Time, I actually like that you inadvertently help Ganonforf to become more powerful and take control of Hyrule. I don't think it's somthing we had seen yet in a videogame, and to me it actually gives more motivation to the *player* (not only the in-game characters) to defeat him and set things straight. You (and Zelda) being naive and contributing to the downfall of Hyrule despite the best intentions helps to make things more personal. When the credits roll, I feel like I've truly grown by not only becoming more powerful, but also by fixing everyone's evil acts or mistakes (incl. Link's).
A yes, choices that don't matter. Just like the Pokémon games diologues. When they offer you the "no" option, it's usually as a joke and they always repeat "No way, it's too shocking. Let me ask you the question again" or "Ha ha, nice joke, but you really became a champion, right ?" until you choose "yes". A fun example in Black/White 2, when your mom asks you as the protagonist if you want a Pokedex since her friend wants to give one to the protagonist, if you reply back "no", your mom litteraly says "I wish you could be a bit more grateful ! Now, let me ask the question again, do you want a Pokedex ???". Yep, that's my mom alright. Telling me I'm ungrateful until I agree with her. 😂
Do you think Freeman from the Half-Life games should have had dialogue? For the most part I felt immersed by his silence but when Alyx talks to him and he doesn't respond it felt awkward.
I have two, one main problem is when they try to make a quick introduction like - he is the best detective in the world! - and a couple of NPC say this to me. Show, don't tell! And second one is when I fight a boss enemy and then he become part of my team and all suddenly his power level is reduced to minor nameless mob.
Would be cool if enemies also have limited ammo. When they're run out of ammo, they're programmed to retreat and despawn, probably will come back after some times.
Oh maybe someone did mention this game earlier, but there is that game where the silent protagonist is done WELL ! And I of course speak about Lea from CrossCode. Lea is genuinely silent so the developers chose to use the signs language to help Lea express herself. The work they put on her face expressions in order for her to convey messages without speaking a word is marvellous. So you can, like you said, have good silent protagonists, there is another example. Crosscode is my GOTY 2018 (the year it was released) and easily one of my top ten favorite games or ARPG. By the way, Mr McNulty, I subscribed to your fantastic channel, thanks for your very instructive and interesting videos !
I actually own CrossCode but haven't played it yet. Heard amazing things--I'll have to fire it up one of these days Thanks for the kind words about my channel btw!
@@WriterBrandonMcNulty You are more than welcome, your work deserve its recognition. And yes, please, if you can make some time amid your writing sessions, please enjoy Crosscode (if you have played Zelda, Alundra and love wonderful stories, then you're in for a delightful moment, trust me). I'm just sad that the developers decided to move on without exploring more plot possibilities but they are human and need to move on. Only God can spend an eternity working on the same thing (I guess ? ^^)
Thanks! FF8 is an all-time favorite of mine. Squall's character arc is incredible. Have you played Tales of Berseria? That's the one modern JRPG that gave me the strongest FF8 vibes. Definitely worth a look.
@@WriterBrandonMcNulty Thank you for the recommendation. I just put in an order for Tales of Berseria! I've been looking to get back into more JRPG games.
I HATE the first cliche. It made me swear very loudly when playing Far Cry series. I mow down whole island of bad guys, learn how to sneak and kill in a hundred ways and Vaas just catches me in an instant because he... um... was hidden behind the door.
Problem with McGuffins in Mass Effect is how confusing they are. Series doesn't have a LOT of them, it's usually one thing you're looking for. First has the Conduit, which is a backdoor to Citadel where you talk to the Council. BUT you need to find Cipher to access it. You see the problem in 4 vague things using an uncommon word starting with C and having i-l in them. Second ME has you find a path through Omega 4 relay, the only McGuffin-like thing in main story is Reaper IFF which lets you pass through. It is considered best in trilogy for a reason, stories are self-contained, nothing is confusing, focus is on well-written characters, and most of all, no stupid Ci-things to track. Citadel is still there but it's one of four shopping hubs (one of two in ME1 and the ONLY one in 3). Third game, however, has everyone building Crucible, which is something nobody knows anything about apart from it being able to stop the Big Bad. Okay, but to find it you go through the Conduit, AGAIN, which is A DIFFERENT thing from Conduit in ME1, and you arrive at Crucible through Citadel and speak with Catalyst there, THIS IS AT LEAST SIX SEPARATE MCGUFFINS ALL HAVING C-i-l IN THEIR NAME! I played through series enough to memorize half the dialogue and STILL had to Google the various C-things to write this. It's that bad.
Mine is when you acquire a god like weapon that the antagonist uses against you but it has 0 of the same ability and is just a normal weapon once you get it
6:07 Prime example: Heavy Rain. There are two playable characters that no matter what you did, no matter how risky the choices you made, these two will never die until the final chapter because if any of them died midway throughout the story, the game is over so the choices regarding to these didn’t really matter to the outcome.
Final Fantasy devs actually gave an explanation for why you can destroy hordes of enemies during gameplay, but still easily die during a cutscene. It's because all the in-game random battles and all the leveling is not part of the story canon. It's mainly done as an RPG gameplay mechanic to drag out the story. That's why when a character dies (knocked out) in battle from an explosion you can resurrect them with a Phoenix Down or with magic, but if it happens during a cutscene, they are gone for good. When I learned that, it made the leveling seem pointless, because lorewise none of the random encounters actually occurred. It's also part of the reason why I prefer western RPGs like the original Fallout games, because various NPCs will recognize that you killed all those people and you might even lose Karma and/or reputation with various factions/towns. How you choose to play those games has an impact on the in-game world. The only time it doesn't matter is when you have random encounters while traversing the world map.
Really enjoyed this video! (also the prologue video) As someone whose played games for years, I often hear these common criticisms about these cliches. I have my own thoughts on each: #5: That's pretty much my number one. It's difficult because game developers want to give a power fantasy to their players, but also want to tell a compelling narrative. That constant tension is a big reason why scenes like FF10 happen. #4: Its sounds like forced final bosses aren't the problem (isn't every final boss technically forced?) but instead final bosses that feel hollow or don't use the skills you learned in a satisfying way. For example, you used the final boss of Asylum as a bad boss, but one of the best bosses is in Arkham City with Mr. Freeze, where he forces Batman to use different tactics to take him down. #3: Personally, I disagree. In video games, players need goals to have a sense of direction, but the fun comes in the journey & characters you meet along the way. Plus, unlike a movie, you control how long/short the time takes to get the macguffin. Ocarina of time is ironically a great example of doing macguffins right: I could go straight to the item ignoring everything else, or I could take my time & do a side quest or a mini game. Plus, you learn different skills/ abilities (hookshot, bow & arrow, Epona, etc.) that make you & your character feel stronger together in a way you really don't get in other media. (Also, I like the twist that Ganondorf was secretly manipulating the heroes to do the work for him, as it shows a level of cunning & strategy, especially because he was unable to get the stones himself, so he adapted his strategy). Side note: the problem is to many uninteresting, unnecessary macguffins, especially ones that do not impact the story. For example, Donkey Kong 64's ridiculous number of collectibles for no reason other than the game says so. #2: YES, pretty much agree with everything you say here. As I mentioned earlier, it's hard because game developers want to give players freedom but also have a pre-determined narrative they are trying to tell. Most of the time these "choices" could be removed & nothing of substance would be lost. #1: I may be the only one who feels this way, but I actually prefer the silent protagonist. There are only so many ways you can write dialogue for a hero/anti-hero that doesn't feel like we have not already seen it millions of times in books, tv, movies, etc. There is nothing wrong with characters who do talk & have personalities, but video games are unique in that you can project your own thoughts & feelings, something you cannot do in other media. Side note: You mentioned Persona 5 with Joker, it seems like the problem isn't silent protagonists but the story & gameplay conflicting as mentioned previously. This breaks the immersion as it makes no sense to the player. Link works because he has always been seen as the strong silent type, so his silence makes sense; Joker doesn't work because he is supposed to be charismatic when the game does not allow him to be. Just my personal thoughts, enjoyed your video!
The Zelda games where Link goes solo are the most boring to me, because I don't feel the weight of the plot. All character cherishing Link like "You're mi best friend", or love and he said nothing at all just swing a sword while screams. On the opposite side the game Deponia I wished everyone just shut up because all characters were insufferable. Games with silent protagonist going solo tend to bore me but when it has a companion who carries the story things changes like Zelda Twilight Princess or Okami.
so i know that's absolutely not the point but since i see so many people giving their opinion on the silent protagonist, i just got reminded of the game "Rain", in which you play a boy that becomes invisible and that you can only perceive when rain is falling on him. As in the Samus game mentionned in the video where she doesnt really have anyone to talk to, the boy doesnt interact with anyone for most of the game. However, at some point, he meets a girl in the same situation as him, and it is revealed that they cant talk to each other because the wind steals their voice, which actually fits the story, and i just thought it was quite cool
Genshin Impact is a good example that I can immediately think of that uses choices and the silent protagonist tropes, for NO REASON. It does not feel immersive nor does it feel like I'm putting myself in the main character's shoes. To add insult instead of the MC doing the talking, Paimon does it and it's always painfully long, awful exposition dialogue. For an MC looking for their lost sibling as the game's main plot, they should be the one doing the heavy talking.
Yes, I absolutely HATE silent/self-insert protagonists! My favourite video game Genshin Impact has a self-insert protagonist who literally has no personality. The supporting cast are all fleshed out really well and have unique personalities and backstories and dialogue, but it creates a massive rift between the MC and the story because while everything else is so well fleshed out, the MC is not. And everyone also treats the MC as a great individual and stuff when they basically didn't really do anything except fight. Also, there is no dynamic between the protagonist and the other playable characters--they all think the protagonist is the greatest being to walk the earth. Full stop. Honestly it's like a mary sue but in a video game. That was a bit of a rant, but yeah. The MC doesn't even have a fleshed out backstory, just a vague idea--it's not supposed to be revealed until the end of the story, lol.
My MOST HATED! cliche in video games is forced quest. There are two awful ways to execute this in RPG'S 1: "Hey I know where that place is, but first do this thing for me." Me: NO. NPC: Good luck finding it then. And it is IMPOSSIBLE to find the place so you have to accept to advance the plot or else game just stops. 2: "Hey I know you for 5 seconds but please help me save this random person." Me:NO NPC: Please reconsider. NO! please reconsider. Ed Nauseam until you say yes. You can't even exit dialogue tree!
Xenoblade Torna is very funny with that. It is literally "This mf has them fake priorities!": the game. Instead of preparing for the incoming attack from someone having the power to literally erase the world, the playable cast instead decides to become buddy buddy with like 80% of the NPCs in the game(By sidequesting for hours) for no real reason. It's straight up goofy because the story is meant to be a tragedy where they fail at the end and more than half the cast has official responsibilities as important people in the world or being associated with them.
We all know about the armor that has way higher defense than it looks like it should. Also, some characters do really silly things to let the story keep going (ex. Mario beats Bowser Junior but lets him run off to the next tower)
I hate it when there is a chosen one of a prophecy. It is always told in the same way. I wanna choose my destiny myself in a game or a story where the hero makes its own descisions. The trope is a cheap excuse of the lack of character development of the protagonist and its invincibility.
Unnecessary bosses are also bad from the gameplay perspective. Imagine you're Adam Jensen, an operative of Sarif Industries. You're sneaking through a secret FEMA camp, silently taking down enemies one by one and clearing the path forward. Suddenly, you see a huge guy with a minigun attached to his arm. What do you do? You stand up, walk to the center of the room the enemy is in and promptly get turned into swiss cheese by the rapid-firing gun. For the last X hours, you've been training how to evade your enemies and sneak up to them undetected and suddenly the game pushes you into an arena, which demands a completely different set of skills -- ones you never tried before in the entire game. Unsurprisingly, you die time and time again until you finally clear the stage and can continue the game. The boss fight is the final exam of the game, which tests whether you've learned the mechanics. Usually, the mechanics are about combat, so the exam is also a difficult combat encounter. But if the skills you're honing during the game are different, then don't put a stupid combat arena with a boss in the end.
"This is the most important quest ever we don't have a lot of time!" open world game where you can take forever to do that quest if you want to. it just removes the weight and importance of the thing.
@@WriterBrandonMcNultyBotW: "Link, wake up! I know you're not at full strength yet, but I can't hold the calamity back much longer! Break Ganon's hold on the divine beasts and-why are you shield surfing? Link, stop with finding the Koroks, your inventory is maxed out already. Link, your clothes are fine, stop dying them! Dammit Link, you can worry about home improvement projects *after* Hyrule is safe!"
100% agree, especially on the silent protagonists. I rather hate a main character for what they say and who they are than get nothing at all. Just NPCs talking to a wall for the whole game. I want to know why the MC is important and what's their view of whatever universe they're in if I'm to care for the story.
I love that you did a video about video game stories. An RPG on PS2 called Rogue Galaxy was honestly a major part of what inspired me to get into writing. It has 8 party members, all of whom have their own plotline that's explored along the way and they tie together at the end. Some of them are a bit cliche, yeah, but the way they pulled that off is a mark of good storytelling.
Rogue Galaxy had some fun ideas and plot points, but sadly I feel it stretched itself to far and didn’t develop a lot of them well. One of the big ones was a massive war in the galaxy for resources, and was supposed to setup a lot of conflict. While this is usually a good setup for a story, the war is quickly tossed aside and not elaborated on, to the point that after the halfway mark, you’d easily forget the war was a thing
I really dislike when open world games don't acknowledge when you do stuff that sequence breaks. Tears of the Kingdom did this recently. Everyone is driven by the question "Where's Zelda?" But if you do the quests that reveal where she is, you can't tell anyone, and no one changes their behavior based on what you just did an entire questline to find out.
My two favorites are endless dumb side quests that never advance the plot (but I do them all anyway). Skyrim and Fallout are great examples. The other is forcing the player to solve a problem in an overly complicated and stupid way. Assassin's Creed is notorious for this one.
Super Metroid is such a gem you can learn from. I was a youngin' when that game came out, and its atmosphere spooked me so bad lol. The music, the sounds, the emptiness, man, it was great. That set the bar for spook/horror for me. Metroid Dread also did a lot of things extremely well, like having Samus continue the silent protagonist bit in a way that made perfect sense until about halfway or so through the game and then she speaks. It's a terrific moment. And then the final boss? Hoo boy. It was something to see Samus rage so hard.
Something that really bugs me in games like Resident Evil and others is when I have to go 20 miles away to fetch a damn key just to open a wooden door that I could have blasted with my shotgun or even just my shoulder... Or when the way is blocked by a tree trunk or whatever that you could just walk over but can't for some reason
Every god damn game, movie or show in existence does number 5 and it pisses me off so much. ALLL the sudden one or two low level henchmen will get the jump on your character. Like okay sure that would happen -_- this along with unstoppable heroes all the sudden getting "Captured'" are my most hated things that make me yell at the TV when it happens lol. Cheapest writing bullshit that happens way to often like can someone ever make a story without the main character that is a total badass getting captured ? Lol I'm so sick of it
I think the silent protagonist/self insert protagonist is very dependant on the game, I can understand why it would be frustrating in the game you mentioned but I find it really works in many other games. in the game Undertale we have a silent protagonist/self insert protagonist in frisk, however that works because we don't need a lot of dialog for them to make choices that matter and in the genocide run of Undertale the silence makes frisk so much more intimidating, even to the player, there are literally scenes in that run where other characters point out the silence and start getting scared of frisk which is such a jaw dropping moment in the game. and self insert can also really work in games like fallout or Skyrim, where it feels like you are making your own story.
In contrast with the silent protagonist, I despise games where the protagonist needlessly babbles inane quips during gameplay because the writer fancied himself Joss Whedon or Quentin Tarantino.
"This isn't even my final form"-bossfights. They can be fun, but it's such an overused grip that we kind of expect it now. Much more interesting to see a healthbar from here to Kathmandu and think "oh, crap... this is going to take some skill to take down".
I actually like the silent protagonist, but for the rest i agree. I also hate when you, the player, have already spotted the villain but nobody of the game characters did, and you are forced to play along with him even for hours until the inevitable betrayal. Writers, do it for the giggles, but not if i am supposed to take the game seriously
One tropw that i dislike is how funs are treated. In game, they are useless but in cutscenes they are all of a sudden overpowered. Its the same as the unstoppable heroes trope who get defeated in cutscenes. If only game logic made sense.
Yea I think I have to agree with the ppl saying that silent protagonists are preferred for rpg's. Maybe it's a personally thing, but in games like Cyberpunk, Mass Effect, or (vanilla) fallout 4, this person who is supposed to be "me" saying things I never would and using a voice that isn't mine just takes me right out of the game. Even in the call of duty games where the player character start talking, it's just kind of a weird out-of-body sort of experience when you hear dialogue start up and wonder where its coming from and then realize its coming from you. Maybe it's a first-person perspective related thing. Regardless, great video brother
I will keep defending the Telltale games (and similar games) for that. Your choices aren't meant to affect the entire story itself. They are meant to affect “how” the story is told. You can affect how the other characters interact with the protagonist through your choices. Some characters will die at some point, but your choices can affect when and how that happens. So saying that the choices don’t matter, is not fair in my opinion.
i was gonna make a comment about this, but yes, this is true. the choices change everyone's story, not their plots. Ben and kenny's relationship from season 1 is a great show of this. killing ben of early will be a worse send off, when saving him and then seeing him die later is way better for kenny and his losses.
Okay, but I honestly don't think, that Half-Life, Portal, The Talos Principle and some others would have benefited by a talking protagonist. Sometimes less simply is more.
a lot of people in this comment section talks about how it is more immersive to have a silent protagonist, creating your own character, but i think in the case of portal, it loops all the way around again to creating chell's "personality". there isn't anything special about her. heck, she is probably a clone. but just the fact of chell might being a clone of one of the employees of aperture science, and her being mute, is a fun start.
Regarding choices that don't matter: games can also go in the complete opposite direction and you end up with something like Detroit: become human which has a bajillion different endings. At that point, it's unclear what kind of story the developer is even trying to tell and it all feels kinda hollow.
Great video! I can't think of a worst cliche number 2 example than the finale of mass effect 3. Geez, that was horrible. After all that great plot, the fighting, the sacrifices and the hard choices in all the three games, you end up discovering that none of that really mattered, except for a third ending choice that provided a slightly different cutscene from the other two. No surprise mass effect andromeda backfired hard.
I think Link being a semi-silent protagonist works cause we’re seeing the story from his point of view so we don’t see him talk to people but he does talk (albeit not that much) unless the very rare occasions in which he’s reading something or talks to himself. I also love how some games acknowledge the fact that Link doesn’t talk that much or in some cases doesn’t talk at all and kinda allude to why.
The first point reminds me of the third level of Max Payne 3. Max gets shot in the arm by a sniper and spends the rest of the level limping around and bleeding, but the game renders every single bullet hole in your chest and neck every time your character gets hit and Max shrugs it off
I think having choices in games is awesome, and the best I've seen is The Dark Pictures anthology. As for your first point, YES. The exact opposite is why I love Devil May Cry. You may be having trouble fighting enemies but once it reaches a cutscene, your character is an action movie hero dodging everything or brushing off fatal blows. At the start you don't feel like that but with experience and new abilities, you feel like the heroes in the cutscenes.
I hate it when story potential is undercut by the 'need' for an action sequence. Jak 2 has a particularly frustrating example for me: After winning the final cup of the city's big racing tournament, Jak comes face-to-face with Baron Praxis, against whom he's been waging a personal war for the torture he's endured in Praxis' "Dark Warrior" experiments. Jak says, "Just a little closer - we need to talk..." hinting that they may be about to set aside their mutual hatred in light of the bigger stakes of the story, namely, an impending invasion by the Metalheads. Then, after Praxis shrugs off Jak's comment with a brief megalomaniacal speech, they're interrupted when Erol, Jak's racing rival, attempts to ram him with his racer, but crashes and dies. The scene ends with Jak fleeing and Praxis ordering his guards to seize him, effectively leaving the status quo disappointingly unchanged for the next action mission. The whole sequence smacks of wasted story and character possibilities.
Mine is forcing gameplay from one genre into games that are otherwise a different genre. Zelda is loysy with games that force a stealth section but otherwise dont rely on stealth. This is especially irritating in Gerudo fortress, where Link surrenders whenever a Gerudo guard spots him, presumably because he doesnt want to hurt humans, but whenever he frees one of their prisoners, he fights a Gerudo warrior anyway. BotW and TotK fixed this by making stealth helpful, but not necessary.
Any fighting game where the lore sets up some characters as ridiculously powerful and other's as weak children by comparison but then it turns out the one that's weak in the story actually has a broken set of abilities that wipes the floor with 90% of the cast.
This kinda fits into the unstoppable heroes thing, but it's when the game contradicts its own rules. One of the worst examples I can think of is from Borderlands 2. The games have clearly established that the 'New You' stations you activate scan/catalogue your DNA and make a clone of you when you die as an in-universe way of handling the video game element of respawning after death. The problem is that they will then kill off characters as part of the story and.....nothing, they're just dead. One of the playable characters from the first game gets killed with one gunshot to the head by the main villain, and it's like....ok, cool, he's been shot 65 million times and died and came back all over the place, but now the game decides it wants to follow real life rules because reasons. Hell, one of the side quests is literally the villain telling you to kill yourself. If you don't, he calls you a coward and you get no reward, if you do, you respawn and he laughs at you and tosses some money your way.
Worst lazy writing in a videogame ever, the "I don't have time to tell you how I don't have time." Destiny 1 When I heard that, I literally yelled out loud, "Oh no you do not give me that bullshit! You get your ass back here and tell me what the fuck is going on!!!"
There being an urgent quest your jet has to complete or a catastrophe happens. Except you have all the time in the world to do a hundred side quests with zero repercussions.
Most hated mechanic? Permanently miss-able items that require fore knowledge to avoid missing. Is there any reason i couldn't just go back into that subway or alley? No? Then why is that super special item locked forever away, because i was trying to get to it, but stepped into the wrong doorway that started a scripted event!?! Arg. If you are going to show me something special, it ought to be an actual choice to miss it - or an intentional story taunt when the bad guys steal it away (implying a choice to either let it go or go chase after it, but possibly messing up another goal)
Depends on the Silent/Self-Insert Protag, I agree that it can be terrible. Like in the Metro series for example, where the story suffers a lot from main character, Artyom, being silent with the exceptions being loading screens which are his thoughts speaking and the occasional grunts. But in the books, he is depicted speaking or at least giving his thoughts out. Honestly, a lot of scenes in the Metro games drive me nuts as characters are speaking to him but either someone fills in Artytom's spot to speak or continue their dialogue/action without input, let alone the lack of dialogue options to interact with the characters. Fallout: New Vegas benefits having a Silent Protag, as not only has great dialogue options, the choices do actually matter and it's easier for the player to envision what the character sounds like while they progress the story as a violent murderer, pacifist or whatever the player wants. Allows for great flexibility and roleplay.
It's interesting to see a writers perspective on games...of course the biggest issue would be dialogue! We should keep in mind however that the fundamental of game design is not story but rather the game play. The story is only additional but happens to be what we feel most attached to. The biggest issue I have with cliche stories is that almost every fantasy RPG has the same exact plot. There's the good guys, an evil villain, a princess, maybe a dragon, and only you the hero with your trusty sword who can save the world. It's been done over and over again a million times.
Fair point with gameplay taking priority, but as gaming stories mature, they're becoming one of the major selling points. I've put up with tedious gameplay for the sake of the story on many ocassions (Silent Hill 4, SOMA, Drakengard, etc.)
If you want more specific, there's a story about a chosen one prophetess who your hero is hired to protect as she makes the trip to some elemental locations before it's revealed she's supposed to die or something. That's the story of Grandia II. And Tales of Symphonia. And Final Fantasy X.
But once in a while we get things like Planescape Torment where your quest is to find out who you are, answer "what can change the nature of a man", and optionally, create complete chaos as you follow the exploits of your past incarnations.... and you can talk almost everyone to death. Only 4 fights are not optional and one of those is a tutorial.
I agree with you on silent protagonists when the other characters are voiced (ofc if game has no voice-over or one for select characters like Fallout or Baldur's Gate that's a different deal). I think that's actually an unpoplar opinion since I've read articles explaining how voiced protagonists ruin gaming or something, i.e. the lower the options or put devs into narrow limits or whatever. Revan and Exile in KOTOR sound awkward and so do the Grey Warden in Dragon Age and Knight Commander in NWN2. Hawke in DA2 is a better character because they have a voice. And self-insert can work either way since tons of things characters do are more immersion breaking than them having voice that can differ from yours.
I understand why some people like silent protagonists, but personally I would rather follow a protagonist who is strongly connected to the story itself.
@@WriterBrandonMcNulty tbh I find it easier to relate to FemShep within the limits than to a blank state silent protagonist who you're supposed to project unto. Except Chell. She does the silent thing wonderfully thanks to how GlADOS is written. Maybe because Portal is written as Jay and Silent Bob in the first place.
I'm not sure I would consider Revan or the Exile to be silent protagonists do to the large amount of dialog options they get. More like unvoiced protagonists. Same with the protagonist in Pathologic 2.
@@Dave-um7mw unvoiced, silent, mute, the argument I heard is that having to fit dialogue options to voice really limited the choices. I mean of character doesn't HAVE lines at all then it's not dialogue but everyone else monologuing to you like in Portal. People even bring up long walls of text from Baldur's Gate or Planescape Torment as an example of dialogue being better when silent, forgetting how uneven the former was and how almost nothing you said mattered and was just flair text. I mean, the most freedom there can be in text promoter games where you can say literally anything you want, yet it always bogs down to "talk shopkeep" followed by "ask lamp" caveman speak. P.S. I won't play Pathologic, Atomic Heart, Pathfinder games or anything else paying taxes in russia, as that buys drones that explode over my house every other day.
Have you ever played Detroit: Become Human? If so, would you say that game is also a case of choices don't matter or no? Because it's one of the few games where the smallest of choices in earlier episodes dramatically change the direction and tone towards the endgame. Like on one my play throughs, I had forgotten that if you use one protagonist to find a secondary character, then that character will not be alive for a later episode where you're playing another protagonist. And because of that, you can actually get that protagonist killed by accident, effectively ending the remaining the 10 or so chapters you were suppose to play as him; also dramatically altering the storylines of the other two protagonist.
For #1, one of the few game series to get the silent protagonist absolutely right is the Pokémon Mystery Dungeon games. You, the main character still speaks in your thoughts, and in the ending of the main stories, the main character speaks actual dialogue, and always leave such emotional endings.
For choices that don’t matter, I believe that such a mechanic is effective in games where part of the theme or point of the game is that your choices just don’t matter. Take Doki Doki Literature Club, for example. No matter what you do, all the girls die and Monika takes over. None of the choices you make during Act 1 actually matter, since the ending is the same anyway. And that works! Because it shows how much control Monika has, and how little control you, the player, has.
When common collectable objects (ie coins, rings, lums) are too detailed and complex. It makes the game far too visually loud, it somehow makes it both too stimulating and boring to look at the same time. Just make your dang collectables easy to look at!
About Link, actually it is explained in Breath of the Wild in Zelda's Diary that he is always quiet because he is a "man of little words" who finds it easier to express himself through actions. Also, he feels pressured to live up to the whole "knight of the prophecy" thing so staying quiet helps him feel at ease that he won't mess up
What i hate in video games is unbelievably tough and pretentious protagonists. Characters who can't talk like human-beings, cannot doubt, cannot guilt-tripping themselves, cannot be hurt, "why so serious", lack of sense humour, lack of charisma, lack of human vulnerability, lack of making mistakes like a human being. And all with those damn pretentious lines and pretentious voice acting. Batman, Kratos, Robocop, Solid Snake, Geralt of Rivia etc. "I must stop them! By any costs!" ughh. Give me a break. That's why Nathan Drake is the killer character (not perfect by any means). And that's why Kratos sucks.
One trope that bothers me is when the massacaring hero suddenly feels a moral conflict about killing the final villain. Think of the Uncharted Games. The defeated villain will taunt Drake, and tell him that he doesn't have it in him to finish him off. He's just not a killer. Um, there are 500 corpses, all felled by Drake, who would say otherwise. Yet, Drake always screws up his face and seems deeply troubled by the terrible choice before him. Sorry Drake, that ship sailed about 30 seconds into the prologue.
Good call! I actually considered this one for my list. MGS3 actually handled this pretty well with The Sorrow
@Writer Brandon McNulty On second thought, I think you sort of covered this one in your trope about the unstoppable hero becoming quite stoppable in a cutscene. The "hero suddenly developing a moral compass in a cutscene" trope is probably a cousin to that one. Both inject an inconsistency into the protagonist to manufacture drama.
Worst offender is Assassin's Creed 2, SO MANY PEOPLE DIED because of Rodrigo Borgia and Ezio finally confronts him, punches him down, and... Decides against killing. Not any time before or after the Assassin mass slaughtering people left and right suddenly decides to not kill the main villain, guess because Ubisoft marketing department decided that having you kill Pope would be almost as bad for PR as... Shudders... Playable women.
But there's a worse equivalent in movies. Hero. A great film, but it was made after China annexed Hong Kong, which meant CCP was running the show and despite the protagonist's best friends literally giving their Iives so he can gain trust of the Emperor by killing them, randomly decides to just not kill Win Shi Huang-Di.
Because the Chinese Communist party forbids showing mass murdering dictators in a bad light. So he kills the Hero but is thankful for him being a good proletariat or something.
That one has made me laugh since Sunset Riders! After you defeat Chief Scalpem his sister begs you not to shoot him because "He's only following orders"... So he's the one bad guy who gets mercy. But what about the hundreds of other mooks you killed? Surely they were all following orders too!
Movies do this too. The hero isn't allowed to kill the villain unless the villain does one last dastardly attempt to kill the hero. It's so dumb. The TV show Firefly was refreshing in that they would just kill a bad guy if it was the reasonable thing to do.
I hate when a character is super strong when fighting against you but is super weak when fighting with you. They did that with Quiet in MGSV and it was a major buzz kill.
Oh, hello Magus, I didn't know you'd be dropping by today.
Katt on Breath of Fire II was a fighting champion and a super hard boss untill she joins your party and is mega underwhelming.
@@magnomendes7373 Katt has the highest agility in the game, so I always give her the Chop Chop skill, which completely ignores enemy defense. She usually crits fairly often, too, so she's a regular in my party, along with Bleu and Bow.
@@alkristopher I prefer Rand, Nina and Bleau myself but that's not the issue. Katt is clearly much weaker as a companion then as an antagonist.
@@magnomendes7373 I still say Katt is more useful than you give her credit for. If you're looking for a game that gives you OP characters after you fight them, Radiata Stories is your alpha and omega, especially with some of the late-gamers. The original Valkyrie Profile is the opposite: weak bosses who join you become very powerful!
The oposite of the unstoppable hero. When you strugle in the game, with limiting mechanichs, and then a cutscene comes and the character starts doing shit you wish you could during playtime.
(examples FFVII remake, Cloud making super jumps, Metal Gear solid 3, Snake taking out Ocelot´s men in an instant, face to face)
MGS Twin Snakes comes to mind here. Snake can't jump at all during gameplay, but he can jump off a flying Nikita missile in the cutscenes
Every Resident evil game...
I remember playing Lego Star Wars as a kid and wishing that the player-characters could jump like the bosses or dropped-out npcs who casually leap over massive gaps.
That's literally every game dude
@@FIREDAN075 you should play more games
2 game cliches i hate. 1 winning the fight then losing in the cutscene right after. 2 the big bad letting you live at the beginning of the game cause you're not a threat.
The only times I disagree is if your going to prison in the beginning and are saved by either yourself or a full on assault on the prison, or your the courier
Idk if I'd say I HATE it. This kinda thing more makes me laugh and breaks immersion. But...
When a game's story is 100% unchangeable, but they let you do things in gameplay to contradict the story.
Last of Us 1, for instance. There is a section of the game where you are escaping from a bunch of men, and main character Joel gets injured. You find out later that those men are from a local group of cannibals, and the leader of the cannibals is very upset at Joel for killing so many of his people. While replaying the game, I tried to escape the place without killing anybody. Basically just running for my life anytime one of them encountered me. And I did pretty good, I managed to avoiding killing all but one guy. And I'm thinking there's no way the guy can be mad about losing only one of his men.
But cannibal leader's scripted dialogue played out exactly the same, saying "I sent a group of men out to look for food, and only a few came back" and "the others were slaughtered by a crazy man travelling with a little girl". And I'm just laughing like, "Must've been some other crazy man with a little girl, cause it sure as hell wasn't me lol"
Great point. Some game stories change if you take the pacific route (MGS3 and Undertale come to mind), but you're right about others that follow the script regardless of the actions taken.
Not sure if you've played Spec Ops: The Line (its story often gets praised), but that one obligates you to do horrible things for the sake of the script. The story forces you to go in a certain direction, and then it judges you for your "choices." It's actually a pretty good story, but it could've been executed a lot better.
I really hate that, even if you don't. I guess I was spoiled by Deus Ex, or at least the parts that actually acknowledged when you shot or just subdued all of the enemies in an area.
@@WriterBrandonMcNulty Hi Brandon. Regarding Spec Ops, I've heard this criticism before and wanted to understand it better as I didn't have it myself when I played. What makes you interpret the game as judging us (the player) for our choices, and not criticizing Walker instead for his? Walker is fully voiced and has his own character so it was pretty easy for me to understand that Walker's actions led to many of the tragedies that occurred, it wasn't anything the player did. Was there something you think would've hammered it in better?
@@zongopbongo It's because the game breaks the fourth wall and asks you questions like, "Are you having fun yet?" or things like that, implying that you're doing horrible things, or at least enabling these horrible things to happen (by playing the game).
I personally do NOT have a problem with this because I don't actually believe anything wrong is happening: It's just a game. I think some people take it personally though. "Hey, this game isn't giving me the option to NOT do this, so why am I being blamed?"
I personally believe this misses the point. The point is that you DID have an option regardless: Don't play the game. You could then have counter-criticisms, e.g., "So you made this game to not make money?" but the further into the weeds we go the farther we get from the point, a point that I think we can appreciate without feeling personally castigated.
honestly, this seem too much to ask. Although, some games do affect dialogues. There will come a point that it wont. Impossible to program all possible dialogue on a 30+ hour game. Unless its very linear
My first mmo cliché is the tedious harvest quest. "Go into the forest, kill beavers, bring me 150 tails."
Second is the unearned Chosen One-ness. I don't mind power fantasy or big destiny per se, but it really disappoints me when all your character has to do is show up and one little dungeon run later your halfway to guildmaster.
Ah! The hero of Kravat!
Chosen one stories are done badly so, so often. Why are they the chosen one? How do people know this? Some coincidence? If you are a level 1 character and already the chosen one, wouldn't it benefit the super powerful, all knowing, world threatening force of evil to come with a full hoard of shock troops while you are collecting apples or rat tails or whatever that quest is in order to wipe you out? And then once it is confirmed that you are the champion of the world, defender of all the things, why do high level areas still expect you to collect rhinosaurus tusks, or whatever, in order to get anyone in the town to give you the time of day? Shouldn't the chosen one be in a position of leadership by then, having peons collect the tusks? If you really are the chosen one, that should CHANGE your position in life because people are going to start deferring to you, following you or expecting things from you. I want to see the character suffer or work through repercussions of everyone thinking they are 'the chosen one'. But that rarely happens. Just a prompt for you to feel, "Ah, I'm the one special person who must go and get the key to the lock that will open the wand that powers the sword that will bring down the house that Jack built. Let's go!"
How about whenever you meet new people the group just magically decide you should be the leader? Sure, all you need to start leading people is show up!
That why I like "the right man in the right place and time"
@@ArcaneWolf9 It's especially hilarious in MMOs. "You're the chosen one!" ... just like everyone else. "The saviour of Blakthan!" ... the 389th today. "You saved the village!" ... actually, you rescued three people and left all the others to their fate. After all, you have to leave someone to rescue for the other Chosen Ones, eh? :D "How could you do that?" ... while literally having no choice whatsoever about what you do in a quest beyond not doing the quest in the first place (which often means you're stuck).
Surprised. But love the insight you can provide for this medium!
My most hated cliche is when the death of side characters is emotionally processed in about two lines of dialogue before the heroes go on and do whatever their big mission is. (While in the same universe the death of a loved one can be the catalyst for a whole revenge journey for the villain.)
Yeah, this frequently pops up in RPGs and adventure games. It's tricky to find the right balance between the appropriate emotion and plot pacing (especially if the plot is really rolling)
@@WriterBrandonMcNulty Oh, good point! Striking the right balance must be difficult. As a story-enjoyer, I just wish emotive storytelling shouldn't be cut off awkwardly in favour of game progression. :'- ) But creative writing must be hard if there's an entire production team sitting in the back.
Its also possible, that after murdering hundreds of beings with a blade in a close range, eye to eye, you will become a emotionless zombie like in the first world war. Whats the one more body on a pile :D
I hate it when you identify who the bad guy is in 10 seconds while the game waits to actually reveal it halfway through or at the end.
My machinations lay undetected for years!
@@rogierb5945 ProZD XD
* cough cough * persona 5
When the villain wants you dead as their main ojective... only for them to not kill you when they got the chance. When the final boss fight happens with that villain, I be like: "what, so NOW you wanna kill me, and not before?? LMAO YOU HAD THE CHANCE EARLIER"! Breaks the immersion and undermines the villain A LOT!
I understand what you mean about the silent protagonist, but in some cases, I believe the silent protagonist is the best choice, specifically for games that have the creation of your own unique character as the main draw, like New Vegas. Having a voice or voice lines that might contradict the character you want to play as would be frustrating which is one of many reasons why a lot of people didn't like Fallout 4s voiced dialogue.
Still a great video though! I would love to see more video game related videos.
Thanks! And that's a fair take on silent protagonists. Obviously I would prefer to have a pre-made, fleshed-out protagonist, but silence can make a create-your-own-character situation more immersive.
I haven't played Fallout 4, but I've heard the complaints you mentioned. I wonder if better dialogue/VAing would've fixed the issue or not? The silent protag in Fallout 3 bothered me, especially during the main quest with the dad. In New Vegas, it didn't bother me as much (for whatever reason).
I think silent protagonists are a lot like prologues. You can get away with them if you do them well, and have reasons to have them be silent. Too many games just make their protagonists silent by default, which always ends up being boring.
I thought Dead Space benefited from a silent protagonist. The character loses his sanity as the game progresses, and it adds to the game's unsettling atmosphere that you don't trust your protagonist's own perception. The remake gave him a voice, and I think I preferred the silent portrayal from the original.
@@WriterBrandonMcNulty I think the silent courrier in New Vegas works because the dialogues themselves are very well written, to the point that I can see myself saying those lines so the voice in my head just fill in the gap itself. It felt like I was the courrier and was having all those conversations with the NPC.
Yes, the older Fallout Protags weren't silent, there was just to much options to make them voiced especially for male and female characters.
There is a difference between fully voicing a game and having multiple choice dialog.
The problem in Fallout 4 was not that the protagonist was voiced, but that the options suffered from it, the dialog was bad and it took from the Choices you could make in the previous games.
tbf telltale games probably only sold because of their story and not their pseudo choices, but then anyone could view the story on the internet to experience it and therefore there is no point in buying the game and that is probably why their company went bankrupt... i feel really bad for them because their games had some of the best stories i have experienced, the ending of the walking dead legit got to me and even though you didnt have any real choices... playing batman the telltale series and batman the enemy within legit made me feel that these things mattered a lot and I actually felt like the protagonist instead of just a passive observer... same with minecraft story mode... RIP telltale... you will always be in my heart...
Silent protagonists can work very well in some games. Portal and portal 2 have some really funny dialogue sequences that are based around the protagonist being mute.
"Say 'apple'"
[Press space to talk]
*the character proceed to jump*
You dangerous. Mute. Lunatic.
And Half-Life, not like it was a ground breaking game that changed the industry or anything, but hey, the protagonist is mute.
Mario never seemed like he needed dialogue, and it may have been a cartridge space issue for Super Mario 64 to only have little catchphrases (which have just stuck around ever since)
When it comes to Quest, I cannot stand that if a little girl NPC has a quest for you, it will always be something along the lines of "I lost my dolly. Please find it for me!"
I couldn't agree more. You're in full heavy plate armour, drenched with the blood of nightmarish monsters, but the little girl comes to you asking about her dolly and you let the monsters run rampage while looking for a toy.
"can you give this music box to my mommy, she's so silly leaving home without it" oh wait
This is a change of pace, I hope to see more videos like this!
I think you're #5 is my #1 lol. I've always hated how unstoppable characters are halted in a cutscenes by events that wouldn't harm them in gameplay. The opposite is also true. Where a cutscene showcases a character's ability that is otherwise not possible in gameplay. I think the latter is actually more common, and its a super pet peeve of mine. Makes me think the character is only extremely strong when the story requires them to be.
Thrilled you enjoyed it! I've wanted to make this video for a while, but I hesitated because I didn't know how my audience would respond to a gaming-focused writing video. Lately I've been feeling burned out from doing "how to" videos, so I thought I'd allow myself to have a little fun.
And great point about this:
"The opposite is also true. Where a cutscene showcases a character's ability that is otherwise not possible in gameplay. I think the latter is actually more common, and its a super pet peeve of mine. Makes me think the character is only extremely strong when the story requires them to be."
YES. I almost included this cliche, but I thought it was too similar to #5. Metal Gear Solid: The Twin Snakes is guilty of this, where you have Snake jumping off missiles in the cutscenes, but he can't even jump at all during actual gameplay. Devil May Cry also comes to mind with this.
@@WriterBrandonMcNulty "Spectacle fighters" in general tend to fall prey to this "reverse #5" trope. Devil May Cry, Bayonetta, Metal Gear Rising: Revengeance, Vanquish, etc. All the protagonists do sick stuff in cutscenes while you're left wondering where the button to do that is on your controller.
I once played an RPG where I was over-leveled for the final boss. I was wrecking his ass, I one-shotted him to half health and a cutscene plays and he says "HAHAHA YOU ARE SO WEAK. YOU ARE DELUSIONAL IF YOU THINK YOU CAN BEAT ME". I finished him off with one blow.
@@LordBaktorExcept you can do sick stuff in those games (especially Devil May Cry) you just need to figure out how to do it.
@@Hedron1027 Yes, you can do sick stuff, but not the over the top things they do in cutscenes. I remember Raiden in Revengeance going bananas in the cutscenes, suplexing metal gears and stuff.
When there is supposed to be a time sensitive moment in the main quest but the gameplay reflects no sense of urgency, encouraging you to explore, grind or even take on trivial side quests.
Fallout 4
Mass Effect 2 does a great job with this
SPOILERS AHEAD
when the crew gets captured, the squadmates say that they should save the crew as soon as possible and they’re right because if you decide to do more than two missions beforehand then the entire crew dies
Totally
I don't have a problem with this, I play really really slow. A 60-hour game would be 120 hours for me. I hated games that had a timer on me, especially open-world RPGs where I just want to take my time and explore.
@@One.Zero.One101 yeah, my brother is like that too. Drove me nuts when I would play with him. Every nook and cranny!
When the Lead hero is suddenly incapacitated be the thought of loosing a dear close ally and almost can’t carry on even though he wades through the corpses of his enemies for nearly the entire game.
You know what game actually urks me with the silent protagonist? The old call of duty modern warfare trilogy! As much as I love the story, whenever you played as a specific character they suddenly go completely mute or were completely mute from the start. Think about Soap, who were introduced to in Cod 4. He's silent until Mw2, where he takes the role of captain and you're no longer in control of him. He's very talkative, until one of the later missions where you begin playing as him and all of a sudden he doesn't speak, lol. Same thing with characters like Yuri in Mw3, really takes me outta the story for a little
Love the fact that you give attention to video games. I love books but some of my favorite stories are from video games too. Great video!
It frustrates me when a character is super powerful in cutscenes but mediocre in gameplay. An example is Jack in Mass Effect 2. When you meet her she's annihilating giant mechs that have multiple health bars and are difficult opponents in gameplay, but when she joins your squad she's one of the most useless squadmates in the game.
Halo 2 legendary.
As a writer (and someone who doesn’t like talking aloud), I find the “silent protagonists only exist as self-inserts” argument to be in bad taste. It gives off the idea that verbal speech (and only frequent verbal speech) is what gives a person character. There are indeed people who only speak when they feel that they have to (like dialogue options). And some characters simply choose to show their personality through their actions, or how they dress, or how they decorate their home. Judging a character simply by speech feels like an unnecessary limit to a person’s experience.
And sometimes… a character is better off without voiced lines. Look at the Zelda cartoon or CDI games; Link speaking would be cursed at best.
I really dislike when games stories move the goalpost too much. Like the objective will start out as 'go to blank city major story stuff is going to happen there'. But then there a an unopenable gate or something in the way and you have to go on a wild tangent to a side dungeon to get the key for the gate.
Ahhh, this reminds me of Resident Evil games where you need a specific key to open a specific door... My question is, why can't I just use my character's shotgun to blast the doorknob? Maybe if ammo is super-scarce I can decide whether I want to find the key or spend precious ammo. That would make things more interesting.
Also, with those gates you mentioned... Sometimes they appear short enough for the characters to jump/climb over but of course the game never lets you attempt the most obvious solution.
@@WriterBrandonMcNulty yet that got nothing on the impassable waist high fence of doom that characters can't hop over. Many games had those.
@@KasumiRINA The "One Foot Tall Brick Wall"
The chest high wall
Ah yes, I too have played Final Fantasy 7 Remake
If there is a "unstopable hero" and "silent peotagonist" i can get behind, is the Doom Slayer, you are unstopable during gamrplay, and everyone shit bricks in your presence during cutscenes, and he is also, not completely "silent" you can pretty much understand whar he is saying or expresing for his mannerism
Ah yes, you did it at last. :)
I'll just quickly point out that some of these can apply to other art forms too. For example, the one about having too many McGuffins could come up in books, movies, tv series, etc. There's probably a lot of self-published fantasy adventure ebooks with too many McGuffins to keep track of. And the self-insert protagonist is something I've seen people complain about in other art forms too. Namely, there's an ongoing debate over whether it's necessary to make main characters relatable. A lot of book publishers say you have to have a relatable protagonist, but tons of people disagree with that because relatable protagonists are usually boring.
Anyway, love the video, and I'm glad to see it getting a positive reception. :)
Thanks! And great points about these spilling into other mediums.
Also, it seems UA-cam finally stopped auto-filtering your comments as spam--it's about time!
Hard agree with you on the silent protagonists. And the worst part about Link is: they did a FANTASTIC version of him in Skyward Sword. While he was still silent, not only did he have a ton more options for dialogue, but he was severely more expressive in cutscenes. There is even a character development in his emotions as you go through the game, from a meek childhood friend who always has to be saved to a confident hero tearing through hell to get your girl back. In this case, some of his silence can speak volumes. So I was really disappointed that they just kind of made Link boring and uninteresting again in BotW and TotK.
I think my most hated story cliche is the same in videogame as it is in other medium: the love triangle. I've seen very few love triangles that are actually interesting (and by 'very few' I mean once), and most of the time it's added in the middle of the story to create cheap drama between the main couple. Not at ANY point do you believe these characters will end up with literally anybody else so this entire third wheel entering adds nothing but padding to a plot. If there are actually other stories out there with good love triangles, I'd love to know that they exist beyond the one I know, but highly doubtful.
EDIT: Also, while we're on the topic, I'd love to see another video on this subject, but on videogame tropes that you LOVE instead. I'd love to know what cliches you can do exclusively in videogames that are great examples of the medium.
Thanks! And I didn’t even consider doing a “best tropes” version, but I’ll add that to my request list
Yeah, I LOTHE love triangles.... If I was writing a story where more than one character loves a single one. I'd just rather they poly it up. It's not traditional, but for some characters. It just works.
But... the way most people write the triangles. It makes everyone involved devolve into annoying assholes. And frankly... I just am NOT about the drama....
I’ll be honest, I actually really like the silent protagonist trope. I don’t think every protagonist should have lots of dialog, and it does work better for characters like Mario and Link to be silent instead of speaking full sentences.
I actually released a video recently addressing the sleugh of complaints that fallout 4 gets because it actually has a voiced character with a backstory. the backstory isn't great, but simply replacing the protagonist with a voiceless blank slate doesn't help the story when it's based on the premise of a person searching for their kidnapped son. it was not well received...
Link has a reason in BOTW to not talk. In Zelda's diary, she says that Link talked to her once, and said that he doesn't talk because with so many eyes on him, and so much pressure to save Hyrule from evil, he took a vow of silence.
I still wish the game actually explored it more. Link may not have to talk, but they could have at least let him emote or show his emotions through facial expressions, which would hint to his true feelings during a situation.
But instead Link is just a face plate that only changes either when he’s angry or when he’s cooking food. It still felt like a missed opportunity to me.
While I do get the point about Ocarina Of Time, I actually like that you inadvertently help Ganonforf to become more powerful and take control of Hyrule.
I don't think it's somthing we had seen yet in a videogame, and to me it actually gives more motivation to the *player* (not only the in-game characters) to defeat him and set things straight.
You (and Zelda) being naive and contributing to the downfall of Hyrule despite the best intentions helps to make things more personal.
When the credits roll, I feel like I've truly grown by not only becoming more powerful, but also by fixing everyone's evil acts or mistakes (incl. Link's).
A yes, choices that don't matter. Just like the Pokémon games diologues. When they offer you the "no" option, it's usually as a joke and they always repeat "No way, it's too shocking. Let me ask you the question again" or "Ha ha, nice joke, but you really became a champion, right ?" until you choose "yes".
A fun example in Black/White 2, when your mom asks you as the protagonist if you want a Pokedex since her friend wants to give one to the protagonist, if you reply back "no", your mom litteraly says "I wish you could be a bit more grateful ! Now, let me ask the question again, do you want a Pokedex ???". Yep, that's my mom alright. Telling me I'm ungrateful until I agree with her. 😂
Do you think Freeman from the Half-Life games should have had dialogue? For the most part I felt immersed by his silence but when Alyx talks to him and he doesn't respond it felt awkward.
Freeman isn't a character, he's a force of nature!
Gordon Freeman is a professional, he didn't have to hear this.
Bosses that take forever to beat
I have two, one main problem is when they try to make a quick introduction like - he is the best detective in the world! - and a couple of NPC say this to me. Show, don't tell! And second one is when I fight a boss enemy and then he become part of my team and all suddenly his power level is reduced to minor nameless mob.
1:19 when sora Donald and Goofy get overwhelmed by heartless…like guys…really? YOURE THE AVENGERS AT THIS POINT. 😂
a silly one but, when enemies have inifinite ammo/resources, until you kill them and then they just had 2 bullets left.
Yes, this drives me nuts. Also happens to the heroes too (out of ammo in gameplay, but the cutscene starts and they have ammo again)
Would be cool if enemies also have limited ammo. When they're run out of ammo, they're programmed to retreat and despawn, probably will come back after some times.
Oh maybe someone did mention this game earlier, but there is that game where the silent protagonist is done WELL !
And I of course speak about Lea from CrossCode. Lea is genuinely silent so the developers chose to use the signs language to help Lea express herself. The work they put on her face expressions in order for her to convey messages without speaking a word is marvellous.
So you can, like you said, have good silent protagonists, there is another example. Crosscode is my GOTY 2018 (the year it was released) and easily one of my top ten favorite games or ARPG.
By the way, Mr McNulty, I subscribed to your fantastic channel, thanks for your very instructive and interesting videos !
I actually own CrossCode but haven't played it yet. Heard amazing things--I'll have to fire it up one of these days
Thanks for the kind words about my channel btw!
@@WriterBrandonMcNulty You are more than welcome, your work deserve its recognition.
And yes, please, if you can make some time amid your writing sessions, please enjoy Crosscode (if you have played Zelda, Alundra and love wonderful stories, then you're in for a delightful moment, trust me).
I'm just sad that the developers decided to move on without exploring more plot possibilities but they are human and need to move on. Only God can spend an eternity working on the same thing (I guess ? ^^)
Two minutes in and I’m loving the video already!
Love the dissection of video game writing, and seeing FF8 and FF10 as an example was wonderful.
Thanks! FF8 is an all-time favorite of mine. Squall's character arc is incredible. Have you played Tales of Berseria? That's the one modern JRPG that gave me the strongest FF8 vibes. Definitely worth a look.
@@WriterBrandonMcNulty Thank you for the recommendation. I just put in an order for Tales of Berseria! I've been looking to get back into more JRPG games.
I HATE the first cliche. It made me swear very loudly when playing Far Cry series. I mow down whole island of bad guys, learn how to sneak and kill in a hundred ways and Vaas just catches me in an instant because he... um... was hidden behind the door.
Problem with McGuffins in Mass Effect is how confusing they are. Series doesn't have a LOT of them, it's usually one thing you're looking for. First has the Conduit, which is a backdoor to Citadel where you talk to the Council. BUT you need to find Cipher to access it. You see the problem in 4 vague things using an uncommon word starting with C and having i-l in them.
Second ME has you find a path through Omega 4 relay, the only McGuffin-like thing in main story is Reaper IFF which lets you pass through. It is considered best in trilogy for a reason, stories are self-contained, nothing is confusing, focus is on well-written characters, and most of all, no stupid Ci-things to track. Citadel is still there but it's one of four shopping hubs (one of two in ME1 and the ONLY one in 3).
Third game, however, has everyone building Crucible, which is something nobody knows anything about apart from it being able to stop the Big Bad. Okay, but to find it you go through the Conduit, AGAIN, which is A DIFFERENT thing from Conduit in ME1, and you arrive at Crucible through Citadel and speak with Catalyst there, THIS IS AT LEAST SIX SEPARATE MCGUFFINS ALL HAVING C-i-l IN THEIR NAME!
I played through series enough to memorize half the dialogue and STILL had to Google the various C-things to write this. It's that bad.
when I read the title I was like: “wtf is a clich?” and then clicked on the vid he finally said it and I was like: “OHH CLICHÉ!”
Mine is when you acquire a god like weapon that the antagonist uses against you but it has 0 of the same ability and is just a normal weapon once you get it
6:07 Prime example: Heavy Rain.
There are two playable characters that no matter what you did, no matter how risky the choices you made, these two will never die until the final chapter because if any of them died midway throughout the story, the game is over so the choices regarding to these didn’t really matter to the outcome.
Final Fantasy devs actually gave an explanation for why you can destroy hordes of enemies during gameplay, but still easily die during a cutscene. It's because all the in-game random battles and all the leveling is not part of the story canon. It's mainly done as an RPG gameplay mechanic to drag out the story. That's why when a character dies (knocked out) in battle from an explosion you can resurrect them with a Phoenix Down or with magic, but if it happens during a cutscene, they are gone for good. When I learned that, it made the leveling seem pointless, because lorewise none of the random encounters actually occurred. It's also part of the reason why I prefer western RPGs like the original Fallout games, because various NPCs will recognize that you killed all those people and you might even lose Karma and/or reputation with various factions/towns. How you choose to play those games has an impact on the in-game world. The only time it doesn't matter is when you have random encounters while traversing the world map.
Really enjoyed this video! (also the prologue video) As someone whose played games for years, I often hear these common criticisms about these cliches. I have my own thoughts on each:
#5: That's pretty much my number one. It's difficult because game developers want to give a power fantasy to their players, but also want to tell a compelling narrative. That constant tension is a big reason why scenes like FF10 happen.
#4: Its sounds like forced final bosses aren't the problem (isn't every final boss technically forced?) but instead final bosses that feel hollow or don't use the skills you learned in a satisfying way. For example, you used the final boss of Asylum as a bad boss, but one of the best bosses is in Arkham City with Mr. Freeze, where he forces Batman to use different tactics to take him down.
#3: Personally, I disagree. In video games, players need goals to have a sense of direction, but the fun comes in the journey & characters you meet along the way. Plus, unlike a movie, you control how long/short the time takes to get the macguffin. Ocarina of time is ironically a great example of doing macguffins right: I could go straight to the item ignoring everything else, or I could take my time & do a side quest or a mini game. Plus, you learn different skills/ abilities (hookshot, bow & arrow, Epona, etc.) that make you & your character feel stronger together in a way you really don't get in other media. (Also, I like the twist that Ganondorf was secretly manipulating the heroes to do the work for him, as it shows a level of cunning & strategy, especially because he was unable to get the stones himself, so he adapted his strategy).
Side note: the problem is to many uninteresting, unnecessary macguffins, especially ones that do not impact the story. For example, Donkey Kong 64's ridiculous number of collectibles for no reason other than the game says so.
#2: YES, pretty much agree with everything you say here. As I mentioned earlier, it's hard because game developers want to give players freedom but also have a pre-determined narrative they are trying to tell. Most of the time these "choices" could be removed & nothing of substance would be lost.
#1: I may be the only one who feels this way, but I actually prefer the silent protagonist. There are only so many ways you can write dialogue for a hero/anti-hero that doesn't feel like we have not already seen it millions of times in books, tv, movies, etc. There is nothing wrong with characters who do talk & have personalities, but video games are unique in that you can project your own thoughts & feelings, something you cannot do in other media.
Side note: You mentioned Persona 5 with Joker, it seems like the problem isn't silent protagonists but the story & gameplay conflicting as mentioned previously. This breaks the immersion as it makes no sense to the player. Link works because he has always been seen as the strong silent type, so his silence makes sense; Joker doesn't work because he is supposed to be charismatic when the game does not allow him to be.
Just my personal thoughts, enjoyed your video!
The Zelda games where Link goes solo are the most boring to me, because I don't feel the weight of the plot. All character cherishing Link like "You're mi best friend", or love and he said nothing at all just swing a sword while screams. On the opposite side the game Deponia I wished everyone just shut up because all characters were insufferable.
Games with silent protagonist going solo tend to bore me but when it has a companion who carries the story things changes like Zelda Twilight Princess or Okami.
so i know that's absolutely not the point but since i see so many people giving their opinion on the silent protagonist, i just got reminded of the game "Rain", in which you play a boy that becomes invisible and that you can only perceive when rain is falling on him. As in the Samus game mentionned in the video where she doesnt really have anyone to talk to, the boy doesnt interact with anyone for most of the game. However, at some point, he meets a girl in the same situation as him, and it is revealed that they cant talk to each other because the wind steals their voice, which actually fits the story, and i just thought it was quite cool
Genshin Impact is a good example that I can immediately think of that uses choices and the silent protagonist tropes, for NO REASON. It does not feel immersive nor does it feel like I'm putting myself in the main character's shoes. To add insult instead of the MC doing the talking, Paimon does it and it's always painfully long, awful exposition dialogue. For an MC looking for their lost sibling as the game's main plot, they should be the one doing the heavy talking.
Amnesia! Not the game, but the cliche of not knowing what's going on.
Yes, I absolutely HATE silent/self-insert protagonists! My favourite video game Genshin Impact has a self-insert protagonist who literally has no personality. The supporting cast are all fleshed out really well and have unique personalities and backstories and dialogue, but it creates a massive rift between the MC and the story because while everything else is so well fleshed out, the MC is not. And everyone also treats the MC as a great individual and stuff when they basically didn't really do anything except fight. Also, there is no dynamic between the protagonist and the other playable characters--they all think the protagonist is the greatest being to walk the earth. Full stop. Honestly it's like a mary sue but in a video game.
That was a bit of a rant, but yeah. The MC doesn't even have a fleshed out backstory, just a vague idea--it's not supposed to be revealed until the end of the story, lol.
Yep, it drives me nuts whenever a game focuses on character relationships and the MC is essentially a blank slate.
My MOST HATED! cliche in video games is forced quest.
There are two awful ways to execute this in RPG'S
1: "Hey I know where that place is, but first do this thing for me."
Me: NO.
NPC: Good luck finding it then.
And it is IMPOSSIBLE to find the place so you have to accept to advance the plot or else game just stops.
2: "Hey I know you for 5 seconds but please help me save this random person."
Me:NO
NPC: Please reconsider.
NO!
please reconsider.
Ed Nauseam until you say yes. You can't even exit dialogue tree!
Xenoblade Torna is very funny with that. It is literally "This mf has them fake priorities!": the game. Instead of preparing for the incoming attack from someone having the power to literally erase the world, the playable cast instead decides to become buddy buddy with like 80% of the NPCs in the game(By sidequesting for hours) for no real reason. It's straight up goofy because the story is meant to be a tragedy where they fail at the end and more than half the cast has official responsibilities as important people in the world or being associated with them.
We all know about the armor that has way higher defense than it looks like it should. Also, some characters do really silly things to let the story keep going (ex. Mario beats Bowser Junior but lets him run off to the next tower)
I hate it when there is a chosen one of a prophecy. It is always told in the same way. I wanna choose my destiny myself in a game or a story where the hero makes its own descisions. The trope is a cheap excuse of the lack of character development of the protagonist and its invincibility.
I'm not sure this qualifies as a cliche, but shooter games where the bullets aren't affected by gravity drive me nuts--which is all but one franchise.
Unnecessary bosses are also bad from the gameplay perspective. Imagine you're Adam Jensen, an operative of Sarif Industries. You're sneaking through a secret FEMA camp, silently taking down enemies one by one and clearing the path forward. Suddenly, you see a huge guy with a minigun attached to his arm. What do you do? You stand up, walk to the center of the room the enemy is in and promptly get turned into swiss cheese by the rapid-firing gun. For the last X hours, you've been training how to evade your enemies and sneak up to them undetected and suddenly the game pushes you into an arena, which demands a completely different set of skills -- ones you never tried before in the entire game. Unsurprisingly, you die time and time again until you finally clear the stage and can continue the game.
The boss fight is the final exam of the game, which tests whether you've learned the mechanics. Usually, the mechanics are about combat, so the exam is also a difficult combat encounter. But if the skills you're honing during the game are different, then don't put a stupid combat arena with a boss in the end.
"This is the most important quest ever we don't have a lot of time!"
open world game where you can take forever to do that quest if you want to. it just removes the weight and importance of the thing.
The Frozen Timeline! Yep, definitely breaks the realism
@@WriterBrandonMcNultyBotW: "Link, wake up! I know you're not at full strength yet, but I can't hold the calamity back much longer! Break Ganon's hold on the divine beasts and-why are you shield surfing? Link, stop with finding the Koroks, your inventory is maxed out already. Link, your clothes are fine, stop dying them! Dammit Link, you can worry about home improvement projects *after* Hyrule is safe!"
The original Fallout 1 has time limit for you to find the water chip (main objective).
would you rather have a massive open world you can't explore?
because it would make for shitty gameplay...
100% agree, especially on the silent protagonists. I rather hate a main character for what they say and who they are than get nothing at all. Just NPCs talking to a wall for the whole game. I want to know why the MC is important and what's their view of whatever universe they're in if I'm to care for the story.
Yep, great point... I can't stand Sora from Kingdom Hearts, but at least I can understand him and how he factors into the story
if you don't understand why silent protagonist work for video games then you aren't the audience there catering too.
@@Blanktester685 I didn't say I don't understand, I said I don't like it.
I love that you did a video about video game stories. An RPG on PS2 called Rogue Galaxy was honestly a major part of what inspired me to get into writing. It has 8 party members, all of whom have their own plotline that's explored along the way and they tie together at the end. Some of them are a bit cliche, yeah, but the way they pulled that off is a mark of good storytelling.
Thanks! I almost bought Rogue Galaxy back in 2007 but went with Valkyrie Profile 2 instead. Such a great era for JPRGs. Still tons I want to play
Rogue Galaxy had some fun ideas and plot points, but sadly I feel it stretched itself to far and didn’t develop a lot of them well. One of the big ones was a massive war in the galaxy for resources, and was supposed to setup a lot of conflict. While this is usually a good setup for a story, the war is quickly tossed aside and not elaborated on, to the point that after the halfway mark, you’d easily forget the war was a thing
I really dislike when open world games don't acknowledge when you do stuff that sequence breaks. Tears of the Kingdom did this recently. Everyone is driven by the question "Where's Zelda?" But if you do the quests that reveal where she is, you can't tell anyone, and no one changes their behavior based on what you just did an entire questline to find out.
My two favorites are endless dumb side quests that never advance the plot (but I do them all anyway). Skyrim and Fallout are great examples.
The other is forcing the player to solve a problem in an overly complicated and stupid way. Assassin's Creed is notorious for this one.
Super Metroid is such a gem you can learn from. I was a youngin' when that game came out, and its atmosphere spooked me so bad lol. The music, the sounds, the emptiness, man, it was great. That set the bar for spook/horror for me.
Metroid Dread also did a lot of things extremely well, like having Samus continue the silent protagonist bit in a way that made perfect sense until about halfway or so through the game and then she speaks. It's a terrific moment. And then the final boss? Hoo boy. It was something to see Samus rage so hard.
So weird seeing Persona 5 Strikers gameplay here. I beat P5R 2 weeks ago and now im playing Strikers lol
I loved Strikers. Thought it would be a cheap spinoff, but it’s a legitimately great game.
Definitely choices not mattering is my least favorite
The Chosen One. Undoubtedly one of the most played out clichés in gaming history.
Something that really bugs me in games like Resident Evil and others is when I have to go 20 miles away to fetch a damn key just to open a wooden door that I could have blasted with my shotgun or even just my shoulder... Or when the way is blocked by a tree trunk or whatever that you could just walk over but can't for some reason
Every god damn game, movie or show in existence does number 5 and it pisses me off so much. ALLL the sudden one or two low level henchmen will get the jump on your character. Like okay sure that would happen -_- this along with unstoppable heroes all the sudden getting "Captured'" are my most hated things that make me yell at the TV when it happens lol. Cheapest writing bullshit that happens way to often like can someone ever make a story without the main character that is a total badass getting captured ? Lol I'm so sick of it
I think the silent protagonist/self insert protagonist is very dependant on the game, I can understand why it would be frustrating in the game you mentioned but I find it really works in many other games. in the game Undertale we have a silent protagonist/self insert protagonist in frisk, however that works because we don't need a lot of dialog for them to make choices that matter and in the genocide run of Undertale the silence makes frisk so much more intimidating, even to the player, there are literally scenes in that run where other characters point out the silence and start getting scared of frisk which is such a jaw dropping moment in the game. and self insert can also really work in games like fallout or Skyrim, where it feels like you are making your own story.
In contrast with the silent protagonist, I despise games where the protagonist needlessly babbles inane quips during gameplay because the writer fancied himself Joss Whedon or Quentin Tarantino.
Mine is the inevitable betrayal trope. It's usually pretty obvious and that makes it all the more annoying.
ua-cam.com/video/DN9DW4rrEjY/v-deo.html
"This isn't even my final form"-bossfights. They can be fun, but it's such an overused grip that we kind of expect it now. Much more interesting to see a healthbar from here to Kathmandu and think "oh, crap... this is going to take some skill to take down".
Sometimes I love multi-form bosses, but other times they feel like a stale cliche
As of late, my most hated video game cliche is the strong female protagonist.
I actually like the silent protagonist, but for the rest i agree. I also hate when you, the player, have already spotted the villain but nobody of the game characters did, and you are forced to play along with him even for hours until the inevitable betrayal. Writers, do it for the giggles, but not if i am supposed to take the game seriously
In Zelda Breath of the Wild, it is built into the story the Link is silent, so I feel like it works, expect for the NPC dialogue
One tropw that i dislike is how funs are treated. In game, they are useless but in cutscenes they are all of a sudden overpowered. Its the same as the unstoppable heroes trope who get defeated in cutscenes.
If only game logic made sense.
cant really do much about it thats the nature of video games.
Yea I think I have to agree with the ppl saying that silent protagonists are preferred for rpg's. Maybe it's a personally thing, but in games like Cyberpunk, Mass Effect, or (vanilla) fallout 4, this person who is supposed to be "me" saying things I never would and using a voice that isn't mine just takes me right out of the game. Even in the call of duty games where the player character start talking, it's just kind of a weird out-of-body sort of experience when you hear dialogue start up and wonder where its coming from and then realize its coming from you. Maybe it's a first-person perspective related thing.
Regardless, great video brother
I will keep defending the Telltale games (and similar games) for that. Your choices aren't meant to affect the entire story itself. They are meant to affect “how” the story is told.
You can affect how the other characters interact with the protagonist through your choices. Some characters will die at some point, but your choices can affect when and how that happens.
So saying that the choices don’t matter, is not fair in my opinion.
i was gonna make a comment about this, but yes, this is true. the choices change everyone's story, not their plots. Ben and kenny's relationship from season 1 is a great show of this. killing ben of early will be a worse send off, when saving him and then seeing him die later is way better for kenny and his losses.
Okay, but I honestly don't think, that Half-Life, Portal, The Talos Principle and some others would have benefited by a talking protagonist. Sometimes less simply is more.
a lot of people in this comment section talks about how it is more immersive to have a silent protagonist, creating your own character, but i think in the case of portal, it loops all the way around again to creating chell's "personality". there isn't anything special about her. heck, she is probably a clone. but just the fact of chell might being a clone of one of the employees of aperture science, and her being mute, is a fun start.
Regarding choices that don't matter: games can also go in the complete opposite direction and you end up with something like Detroit: become human which has a bajillion different endings. At that point, it's unclear what kind of story the developer is even trying to tell and it all feels kinda hollow.
Am I glad I didn't finish the Arkham Asylum game. That ending would have ruffled my feathers.
the ending is fine lmao.
Great video! I can't think of a worst cliche number 2 example than the finale of mass effect 3. Geez, that was horrible. After all that great plot, the fighting, the sacrifices and the hard choices in all the three games, you end up discovering that none of that really mattered, except for a third ending choice that provided a slightly different cutscene from the other two. No surprise mass effect andromeda backfired hard.
I think Link being a semi-silent protagonist works cause we’re seeing the story from his point of view so we don’t see him talk to people but he does talk (albeit not that much) unless the very rare occasions in which he’s reading something or talks to himself. I also love how some games acknowledge the fact that Link doesn’t talk that much or in some cases doesn’t talk at all and kinda allude to why.
The first point reminds me of the third level of Max Payne 3. Max gets shot in the arm by a sniper and spends the rest of the level limping around and bleeding, but the game renders every single bullet hole in your chest and neck every time your character gets hit and Max shrugs it off
I think having choices in games is awesome, and the best I've seen is The Dark Pictures anthology.
As for your first point, YES. The exact opposite is why I love Devil May Cry. You may be having trouble fighting enemies but once it reaches a cutscene, your character is an action movie hero dodging everything or brushing off fatal blows. At the start you don't feel like that but with experience and new abilities, you feel like the heroes in the cutscenes.
I hate it when story potential is undercut by the 'need' for an action sequence.
Jak 2 has a particularly frustrating example for me: After winning the final cup of the city's big racing tournament, Jak comes face-to-face with Baron Praxis, against whom he's been waging a personal war for the torture he's endured in Praxis' "Dark Warrior" experiments. Jak says, "Just a little closer - we need to talk..." hinting that they may be about to set aside their mutual hatred in light of the bigger stakes of the story, namely, an impending invasion by the Metalheads.
Then, after Praxis shrugs off Jak's comment with a brief megalomaniacal speech, they're interrupted when Erol, Jak's racing rival, attempts to ram him with his racer, but crashes and dies. The scene ends with Jak fleeing and Praxis ordering his guards to seize him, effectively leaving the status quo disappointingly unchanged for the next action mission.
The whole sequence smacks of wasted story and character possibilities.
Mine is forcing gameplay from one genre into games that are otherwise a different genre. Zelda is loysy with games that force a stealth section but otherwise dont rely on stealth. This is especially irritating in Gerudo fortress, where Link surrenders whenever a Gerudo guard spots him, presumably because he doesnt want to hurt humans, but whenever he frees one of their prisoners, he fights a Gerudo warrior anyway.
BotW and TotK fixed this by making stealth helpful, but not necessary.
Any fighting game where the lore sets up some characters as ridiculously powerful and other's as weak children by comparison but then it turns out the one that's weak in the story actually has a broken set of abilities that wipes the floor with 90% of the cast.
This kinda fits into the unstoppable heroes thing, but it's when the game contradicts its own rules. One of the worst examples I can think of is from Borderlands 2. The games have clearly established that the 'New You' stations you activate scan/catalogue your DNA and make a clone of you when you die as an in-universe way of handling the video game element of respawning after death. The problem is that they will then kill off characters as part of the story and.....nothing, they're just dead. One of the playable characters from the first game gets killed with one gunshot to the head by the main villain, and it's like....ok, cool, he's been shot 65 million times and died and came back all over the place, but now the game decides it wants to follow real life rules because reasons. Hell, one of the side quests is literally the villain telling you to kill yourself. If you don't, he calls you a coward and you get no reward, if you do, you respawn and he laughs at you and tosses some money your way.
new u stations were already confirmed as non cannon.
Worst lazy writing in a videogame ever, the "I don't have time to tell you how I don't have time." Destiny 1
When I heard that, I literally yelled out loud, "Oh no you do not give me that bullshit! You get your ass back here and tell me what the fuck is going on!!!"
Just about every part of Destiny's storytelling could be listed as a sin.
The forced final boss ruins a game for me. It was part of the reason I finished Tales of Arise and never picked it back up again
There being an urgent quest your jet has to complete or a catastrophe happens. Except you have all the time in the world to do a hundred side quests with zero repercussions.
Most hated mechanic? Permanently miss-able items that require fore knowledge to avoid missing.
Is there any reason i couldn't just go back into that subway or alley?
No? Then why is that super special item locked forever away, because i was trying to get to it, but stepped into the wrong doorway that started a scripted event!?! Arg.
If you are going to show me something special, it ought to be an actual choice to miss it - or an intentional story taunt when the bad guys steal it away (implying a choice to either let it go or go chase after it, but possibly messing up another goal)
Depends on the Silent/Self-Insert Protag,
I agree that it can be terrible. Like in the Metro series for example, where the story suffers a lot from main character, Artyom, being silent with the exceptions being loading screens which are his thoughts speaking and the occasional grunts. But in the books, he is depicted speaking or at least giving his thoughts out. Honestly, a lot of scenes in the Metro games drive me nuts as characters are speaking to him but either someone fills in Artytom's spot to speak or continue their dialogue/action without input, let alone the lack of dialogue options to interact with the characters.
Fallout: New Vegas benefits having a Silent Protag, as not only has great dialogue options, the choices do actually matter and it's easier for the player to envision what the character sounds like while they progress the story as a violent murderer, pacifist or whatever the player wants. Allows for great flexibility and roleplay.
It's interesting to see a writers perspective on games...of course the biggest issue would be dialogue! We should keep in mind however that the fundamental of game design is not story but rather the game play. The story is only additional but happens to be what we feel most attached to. The biggest issue I have with cliche stories is that almost every fantasy RPG has the same exact plot. There's the good guys, an evil villain, a princess, maybe a dragon, and only you the hero with your trusty sword who can save the world. It's been done over and over again a million times.
Fair point with gameplay taking priority, but as gaming stories mature, they're becoming one of the major selling points. I've put up with tedious gameplay for the sake of the story on many ocassions (Silent Hill 4, SOMA, Drakengard, etc.)
If you want more specific, there's a story about a chosen one prophetess who your hero is hired to protect as she makes the trip to some elemental locations before it's revealed she's supposed to die or something. That's the story of Grandia II. And Tales of Symphonia. And Final Fantasy X.
But once in a while we get things like Planescape Torment where your quest is to find out who you are, answer "what can change the nature of a man", and optionally, create complete chaos as you follow the exploits of your past incarnations.... and you can talk almost everyone to death. Only 4 fights are not optional and one of those is a tutorial.
I agree with you on silent protagonists when the other characters are voiced (ofc if game has no voice-over or one for select characters like Fallout or Baldur's Gate that's a different deal). I think that's actually an unpoplar opinion since I've read articles explaining how voiced protagonists ruin gaming or something, i.e. the lower the options or put devs into narrow limits or whatever. Revan and Exile in KOTOR sound awkward and so do the Grey Warden in Dragon Age and Knight Commander in NWN2. Hawke in DA2 is a better character because they have a voice. And self-insert can work either way since tons of things characters do are more immersion breaking than them having voice that can differ from yours.
I understand why some people like silent protagonists, but personally I would rather follow a protagonist who is strongly connected to the story itself.
@@WriterBrandonMcNulty tbh I find it easier to relate to FemShep within the limits than to a blank state silent protagonist who you're supposed to project unto.
Except Chell. She does the silent thing wonderfully thanks to how GlADOS is written. Maybe because Portal is written as Jay and Silent Bob in the first place.
I'm not sure I would consider Revan or the Exile to be silent protagonists do to the large amount of dialog options they get. More like unvoiced protagonists. Same with the protagonist in Pathologic 2.
@@Dave-um7mw unvoiced, silent, mute, the argument I heard is that having to fit dialogue options to voice really limited the choices. I mean of character doesn't HAVE lines at all then it's not dialogue but everyone else monologuing to you like in Portal.
People even bring up long walls of text from Baldur's Gate or Planescape Torment as an example of dialogue being better when silent, forgetting how uneven the former was and how almost nothing you said mattered and was just flair text.
I mean, the most freedom there can be in text promoter games where you can say literally anything you want, yet it always bogs down to "talk shopkeep" followed by "ask lamp" caveman speak.
P.S. I won't play Pathologic, Atomic Heart, Pathfinder games or anything else paying taxes in russia, as that buys drones that explode over my house every other day.
Have you ever played Detroit: Become Human? If so, would you say that game is also a case of choices don't matter or no? Because it's one of the few games where the smallest of choices in earlier episodes dramatically change the direction and tone towards the endgame.
Like on one my play throughs, I had forgotten that if you use one protagonist to find a secondary character, then that character will not be alive for a later episode where you're playing another protagonist. And because of that, you can actually get that protagonist killed by accident, effectively ending the remaining the 10 or so chapters you were suppose to play as him; also dramatically altering the storylines of the other two protagonist.
For #1, one of the few game series to get the silent protagonist absolutely right is the Pokémon Mystery Dungeon games. You, the main character still speaks in your thoughts, and in the ending of the main stories, the main character speaks actual dialogue, and always leave such emotional endings.
For choices that don’t matter, I believe that such a mechanic is effective in games where part of the theme or point of the game is that your choices just don’t matter. Take Doki Doki Literature Club, for example. No matter what you do, all the girls die and Monika takes over. None of the choices you make during Act 1 actually matter, since the ending is the same anyway. And that works! Because it shows how much control Monika has, and how little control you, the player, has.
When common collectable objects (ie coins, rings, lums) are too detailed and complex. It makes the game far too visually loud, it somehow makes it both too stimulating and boring to look at the same time. Just make your dang collectables easy to look at!
About Link, actually it is explained in Breath of the Wild in Zelda's Diary that he is always quiet because he is a "man of little words" who finds it easier to express himself through actions. Also, he feels pressured to live up to the whole "knight of the prophecy" thing so staying quiet helps him feel at ease that he won't mess up
What i hate in video games is unbelievably tough and pretentious protagonists. Characters who can't talk like human-beings, cannot doubt, cannot guilt-tripping themselves, cannot be hurt, "why so serious", lack of sense humour, lack of charisma, lack of human vulnerability, lack of making mistakes like a human being. And all with those damn pretentious lines and pretentious voice acting. Batman, Kratos, Robocop, Solid Snake, Geralt of Rivia etc. "I must stop them! By any costs!" ughh. Give me a break. That's why Nathan Drake is the killer character (not perfect by any means). And that's why Kratos sucks.
The silent protagonist in Dragon Age is unbearable