Characters vs. No Characters

I think one of the main differences in games with characters vs. games without characters is how in control they make you feel.

For example, games like SimCity and The Sims give the player a feeling of a god. You see the game from above and you can go to any part of the world by dragging the screen. Also, you can make things happen just by clicking different things in menus.

This vision makes me feel like a powerful being controlling a little city from far away.

On the other hand, in games like The Walking Dead and Assassin’s Creed you are limited by the main character’s vision and actions. Although you are responsible for the actions, you feel like you are the character. You try to understand what the character is going through and what would he or she do in each situation, and at the same time you also consider what would you do in each situation. Then, it is like you and the character become one.

I feel like a badass tree-climbing assassin even though in real life i can barely properly walk.

I don’t think that necessarily one type of game is better than the other because of the things said above. I just think they provide different experiences and I love both types!

0 thoughts on “Characters vs. No Characters

  1. And then there are interesting games like Fable 3, which try to merge the two. Though the game unsuccessfully managed to craft either of the genres into a compelling story, I really like the concept. Moving from a more intense and emotional individual perspective, as you were describing, to a less personal but more player-control oriented genre is a really neat design that I would love to see better executed in the future. In this way we’re really able to increase the level of our immersion in the world, as we both care about it from an individual’s perspective and from a “god’s” (or King’s, in the case of Fable 3) perspective.

Leave a Reply