Weird Bioware NPMC design philosophy

[Monocause]

So The Witcher II came out. When I played through the prologue I thought that Foltest is a truly memorable character, which later on got me thinking about the memorable characters from the first game. Digging deeper I recalled some folks from Risen, FO:NV, VTM:B. Long story short, there were quite a few of them, even when it comes to games that I haven't replayed for ages. Not to mention the older games, but I'm not taking these into account on purpose; I played them when I was younger and more impressionable.

That, obviously, got me also thinking about recent Bioware games, as in: ME games and DA games - Jesus, how bland are the NPMCs (non party member characters) there. I replayed ME1 some time ago and can't recall any single character aside from the PMs (and that's just because I've seen them all the time, one-liners are hardly memorable), same with ME2 - with the notable exception of Captain Anderson and some parts of Normandy's crew, but I guess they don't count. I finished both of these games twice in the past three years.

With DA:O and DA2 it's quite similar. Origins? I honestly can't find any sort of personality in the NPCs there. I remember a couple of names, sure - but it's mostly due to the fact that they were quest related. But could I describe, say, Arl Eamon in any more detail than some vague "A stereotypical honorable human noble"? No. Same with all the dwarves who are simply "funny backstabbing cunts". In DA2 the only non party member characters I remember are Gamlen, Varric's brother and the Arishok - the last one probably because he was the only Qunari with any sort of exposition. Even Meredith didn't really have a personality to speak of. The description I come up with is "A formerly just and proper templar with her mind twisted by some evil magic" and that's all there really is to her.

Here's the meritum of this thread: I don't believe that Bio writers and artists (the blandness also covers samey character models and painfully recycled VAs who didn't even try to diversify their acting) are so inept that they can't instill any sort of personality into NPM characters - especially since I don't think BG2 was that bland. Perhaps this is a design philosophy of sorts? Maybe the rationale behind this is: if the whole world is unremarkable and every character you meet is bland, your party members feel more unique and heroic.

DISCUSS!

 

[sgc_meltdown]

hey this style of storyline and event progression worked and people liked it and bought our game lets use it again

hey this character archetype worked and people quote their dialogs a lot and think they are deep and hilarious lets use them again

"hey how about a new kind of character"

are you going to take responsibility if nobody likes the character are you going to pay for the modelling and VA huh

"I was just"

PEOPLE STILL THINK BIOWARE WRITING IS GREAT WHY DO YOU WANT TO CHANGE THAT I THOUGHT YOU WERE A TEAM PLAYER

 

[SCO]

Focus tested to death.

 

[Jaesun]

Here's the meritum of this thread: I don't believe that Bio writers and artists (the blandness also covers samey character models and painfully recycled VAs who didn't even try to diversify their acting) are so inept that they can't instill any sort of personality into NPM characters - especially since I don't think BG2 was that bland. Perhaps this is a design philosophy of sorts? Maybe the rationale behind this is: if the whole world is unremarkable and every character you meet is bland, your party members feel more unique and heroic.

When your prime demographic is an ADD addled console kid quickly skipping through all dialogues and just wants to Win The Game it's not that much a surprising change of events at BioWare for their current games...

 

[DraQ]

So The Witcher II came out. When I played through the prologue I thought that Foltest is a truly memorable character, which later on got me thinking about the memorable characters from the first game. Digging deeper I recalled some folks from Risen, FO:NV, VTM:B. Long story short, there were quite a few of them, even when it comes to games that I haven't replayed for ages. Not to mention the older games, but I'm not taking these into account on purpose; I played them when I was younger and more impressionable.

That, obviously, got me also thinking about recent Bioware games, as in: ME games and DA games - Jesus, how bland are the NPMCs (non party member characters) there. I replayed ME1 some time ago and can't recall any single character aside from the PMs (and that's just because I've seen them all the time, one-liners are hardly memorable), same with ME2 - with the notable exception of Captain Anderson and some parts of Normandy's crew, but I guess they don't count. I finished both of these games twice in the past three years.

With DA:O and DA2 it's quite similar. Origins? I honestly can't find any sort of personality in the NPCs there. I remember a couple of names, sure - but it's mostly due to the fact that they were quest related. But could I describe, say, Arl Eamon in any more detail than some vague "A stereotypical honorable human noble"? No. Same with all the dwarves who are simply "funny backstabbing cunts". In DA2 the only non party member characters I remember are Gamlen, Varric's brother and the Arishok - the last one probably because he was the only Qunari with any sort of exposition. Even Meredith didn't really have a personality to speak of. The description I come up with is "A formerly just and proper templar with her mind twisted by some evil magic" and that's all there really is to her.

Here's the meritum of this thread: I don't believe that Bio writers and artists (the blandness also covers samey character models and painfully recycled VAs who didn't even try to diversify their acting) are so inept that they can't instill any sort of personality into NPM characters - especially since I don't think BG2 was that bland. Perhaps this is a design philosophy of sorts? Maybe the rationale behind this is: if the whole world is unremarkable and every character you meet is bland, your party members feel more unique and heroic.

DISCUSS!

Waitwaitwait. You mean BW character design skills have dropped below what Beth demonstrated in Morrowind?

:D

 

[1eyedking]

F3:NV had memorable characters? LOLWHO

That's like saying Alpha Protocol had them too (see what I did there?).

 

[mondblut]

Why would Bioware bother with NPC personalities when there are no romance options involved?

 

[Crooked Bee]

As much as I liked New Vegas, I don't recall any memorable NPCs apart from Chief Hanlon, Yes Man, and to a much lesser extent Cass (mostly thanks to the "Shh.. We're hunting shitheads" line). I guess you could say the Vaults are NV's memorable characters, though.

 

[oldmanpaco]

I remember that irritating reporter you could smack in ME1. Of course I don't remember her name. Just that you could get all EXTREME on her.

 

[commie]

I think Bioware has mediocre writers that do not understand the subtlety and depth needed to make a memorable character.

Jaesun mentioned the ADD demographic, but I'm not too sure that's the reason for the bland characters and settings. After all they have no problem writing walls of text for Codex/Journal entries, lore history etc. The problem is that all this stuff is essentially dry and encyclopedic written without skill or enthusiasm.

On top of this, characters are created with an eye to please the demographic at which the game is targeted at, other character types people clamor for are released as DLC. The character becomes a product, not an entity with a soul. This of course is for proper NPC's and not just folks you come across, but it brings forth the problem across the board. If even most of the characters that are 'essential' to the game are bland, then what hope that they'd bother with giving quest dispensers and world filler NPC's any depth?

 

[sea]

I think it comes down to BioWare's focus on NPCs being largely there as a means of conveying the plot, rather than being, you know, people in their own right. Rather than have the story come out of the social, economic, political, etc. conditions of the world, they basically figure out a story and then fashion everything else around it. Not that thought doesn't go into their character design, of course, but you can tell the vast majority of effort goes into the party members, as they're considered to have higher priority. Arl Eamon is written as a human noble, an upstanding person who respects others who help him - and that's exactly what he needs to be given the story, no more, no less.

If you notice the titles you mentioned, they're nowhere near as party-driven as your typical BioWare title (though they do have some, certainly, they don't hold the same degree of focus). Coming up with good characters with real depth to them is hard, and BioWare largely reserve that for villains and joinable NPCs, not the people who sit around to dispense quests. It's not necessarily for the best, and not necessarily a valid excuse, but I can understand why they might want to prioritise resources that way - focus on the people who you'll be spending the most time with in the game, not on those who are just there to deliver exposition or fill the game out with side-quests.

 

[santino27]

To be fair, I remembered quite a few NPCs from ME1, most of whom made second appearances in ME2 (Shiala, the green asari chick with the Thorian, the female investigator <something> Parisan, Fisk, etc.)

I thought that was one of the only things ME2 did reasonably well... even if it was just an email, you often ran into or heard from some of the more memorable characters from ME1.

By contrast, I cannot remember a single NPC from FO3 or FO3:NV (other than the annoying cowboy robot from NV)

 

[Saark]

By contrast, I cannot remember a single NPC from FO3 or FO3:NV (other than the annoying cowboy robot from NV)

FO3 sucked anyway. New Vegas had some memorable characters, but what really stuck to my memory were the locations. From Major Questhubs to small Sidequest Areas, most of them, especially the Vaults, had something special in the way they were designed or presented. The only reason I can recall some of the Faggotage Locations were due to the brainsucking amounts of filler combat they contained. Oh the pain...

 

[Baron]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BofAzDRL ... re=related

 

[Awor Szurkrarz]

Here's the meritum of this thread: I don't believe that Bio writers and artists (the blandness also covers samey character models and painfully recycled VAs who didn't even try to diversify their acting) are so inept that they can't instill any sort of personality into NPM characters - especially since I don't think BG2 was that bland. Perhaps this is a design philosophy of sorts? Maybe the rationale behind this is: if the whole world is unremarkable and every character you meet is bland, your party members feel more unique and heroic.

When your prime demographic is an ADD addled console kid quickly skipping through all dialogues and just wants to Win The Game it's not that much a surprising change of events at BioWare for their current games...

And what ADD has to do with it? What the fuck is the deal with these retarded prejudices? Someone with ADD can as well start playing some complicated game and hyperfocus on it at expense of learning for school, homework and other chores.

 

[BelisariuS.F]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l6rtQ0-ez4g

 

[attackfighter]

Perhaps this is a design philosophy of sorts?

I think their design philosophy was to make the world as believable as possible (for a fantasy RPG videogame, at least). That's why so many things were borrowed from real world history, ie Telvinter Imperium = Roman Empire, Chantry = Christianity, Quan = Islam, etc. it's all an effort to make the world appear more realistic. I figure they also applied this design philosophy to the characters; instead of having an ultra rightous paladin like Keldorn and an evil, murderous bitch like Viconia, they instead have an apathetic templar named Alistar and a selfish, but not evil, bitch named Morrigan. The characters are all just typical Bioware templates, but they're toned down versions so as not to seem too over-the-top to be 'real'.

Waitwaitwait. You mean BW character design skills have dropped below what Beth demonstrated in Morrowind?

:D

Morrowind had some well designed characters... Vivec, Dagoth Ur, the leaders of certain great houses and guilds. Most characters were filler, but the ones Bethesda put effort into were pretty interesting.

 

[JarlFrank]

Waitwaitwait. You mean BW character design skills have dropped below what Beth demonstrated in Morrowind?

:D

Well, Morrowind had Crassius Curio, Vivec, Almalexia and Caius Cosades, who were all had at least some hints of personality (and in the case of Vivec and Almalexia lots of personality added through lore books than just dialogue alone).

 

[grotsnik]

When I think of NV, I think of Boone, who I thought was underwritten and too obviously in the 'badass out for revenge' mould. But he was a hugely popular character, pretty much because he was a 'growling badass with a gun and a beret, out for revenge with a death wish'. (Awesome!!!!)

I think that's what you get with the majority of Bioware characters; it's not quite 'just the same five archetypes over and over again', as is so often said - but they tend to be very high-concept, very clearly-defined, as if every character needed to be pitched to a board of directors in a 60-second presentation. "So, this elf girl...she's naive, she's sweet, she's innocent - but her innocence results in her summoning demons. This guy - he's nuts! Russian accent, very loud, very enthusiastic, hates evil, thinks his rat's talking to him."

They can often be colourful as a result (like Wrex. C'mon, the guy's whiteboard entry in the writers' room must have just said, "Angry. Likes Violence. Against The Massacre Of His Own People. Doesn't Talk Much. Says, 'Shepard'), but it's a superficial approach.

Mind you, TW2 does have some plain bad characters as well (Dethmold? Really?). Roche is great for the most part, even if they keep fucking about with his motivation so they can keep using him to move the plot onwards.

 

[Serious_Business]

Well, characters in rpgs are more often then not ways to dispense information and to interact with the gameplay. They're not necessarly here to have a personality. Is it their personality that drives the quests, or the quests that drive their personality? The line is fine between litterary considerations and game design considerations. If you want a character to have depth, I do believe you need to have this character in a position as such they will be able to expose their personalities in a relatively extensive manner. As such, the Bioware model is actually rather adapted that "npmcs", as you say, do not have such an opportunity. Only npcs, and person some very key plot npmcs, are the center of the events and can be memorable within such a model.

On the other hand, we all know that this isn't necessarly true (Torment adopted this model). I believe the problem that Bioware suffers, apart from the general consideration we can make about bad writing, lack of creativity, of passion, reliance on voice actors, etc, is this - they don't know how to handle a setting intelligently, and they don't know how to make interesting quests. Both considerations tie into what game design is supposed to be, but I don't think a game is supposed to be a strictly litterary exercice. The experience is not memorable because it's bland and safe. Everything about Bioware games is bland and safe. Even with the model that they adopt, in which npcs are a central part, they have a hard time crafting memorable characters because these characters evolve in a bland and safe environment. They are "party members", they run around, dress up, kill shit, and that's that. They may have an ulterior motivation, which involves probably doing a quest, which will involve running around, picking up shit, killing shit, etc. When you play a Bioware game, that's what you do. The rest doesn't really matter. Minor characters are there to make these quests move along and expose you the shitty setting. More important characters are there to make the plot work, which results in antagonists like Irenicus or Saren. Saren was a terrible, terrible character ; some have said Irenicus was well-written, but that's laughable. I blame it on the good voice acting.

If I take my two points, setting and quests, I've already touched the subject of quests. But the setting in a Bioware game comes down to this - give the player a playground in which they'll feel empowered, which means changing that playground, which in turn means either being the chosen one who's the only one able to stop the antagonist, or making binary moral choices. That scheme gets old fast. How do you fit memorable characters in there? You don't, because it doesn't matter. Everything's a place holder. It's the same model, the details don't matter for shit. The form is the same, the content is also the same. Eventually that's what it comes down to.

 

[Lesifoere]

Here's the meritum of this thread: I don't believe that Bio writers and artists (the blandness also covers samey character models and painfully recycled VAs who didn't even try to diversify their acting) are so inept that they can't instill any sort of personality into NPM characters - especially since I don't think BG2 was that bland. Perhaps this is a design philosophy of sorts? Maybe the rationale behind this is: if the whole world is unremarkable and every character you meet is bland, your party members feel more unique and heroic.

When your prime demographic is an ADD addled console kid quickly skipping through all dialogues and just wants to Win The Game it's not that much a surprising change of events at BioWare for their current games...

And what ADD has to do with it? What the fuck is the deal with these retarded prejudices? Someone with ADD can as well start playing some complicated game and hyperfocus on it at expense of learning for school, homework and other chores.

Excuse me, did you just complain about prejudices on the Codex?

 

[Awor Szurkrarz]

Here's the meritum of this thread: I don't believe that Bio writers and artists (the blandness also covers samey character models and painfully recycled VAs who didn't even try to diversify their acting) are so inept that they can't instill any sort of personality into NPM characters - especially since I don't think BG2 was that bland. Perhaps this is a design philosophy of sorts? Maybe the rationale behind this is: if the whole world is unremarkable and every character you meet is bland, your party members feel more unique and heroic.

When your prime demographic is an ADD addled console kid quickly skipping through all dialogues and just wants to Win The Game it's not that much a surprising change of events at BioWare for their current games...

And what ADD has to do with it? What the fuck is the deal with these retarded prejudices? Someone with ADD can as well start playing some complicated game and hyperfocus on it at expense of learning for school, homework and other chores.

Excuse me, did you just complain about prejudices on the Codex?

It's not just the Codex. It's NMA too.

 

[DraQ]

@JF & attackfighter:

Indeed, some characters were quite interesting, though usually more through their discoverable backgrounds than via dialogue.

 

[Lesifoere]

Here's the meritum of this thread: I don't believe that Bio writers and artists (the blandness also covers samey character models and painfully recycled VAs who didn't even try to diversify their acting) are so inept that they can't instill any sort of personality into NPM characters - especially since I don't think BG2 was that bland. Perhaps this is a design philosophy of sorts? Maybe the rationale behind this is: if the whole world is unremarkable and every character you meet is bland, your party members feel more unique and heroic.

When your prime demographic is an ADD addled console kid quickly skipping through all dialogues and just wants to Win The Game it's not that much a surprising change of events at BioWare for their current games...

And what ADD has to do with it? What the fuck is the deal with these retarded prejudices? Someone with ADD can as well start playing some complicated game and hyperfocus on it at expense of learning for school, homework and other chores.

Excuse me, did you just complain about prejudices on the Codex?

It's not just the Codex. It's NMA too.

No it's like, did you notice all the racism and misogyny? Do you expect either of these forums to be nice to ADDers?

 

[sea]

I think that's what you get with the majority of Bioware characters; it's not quite 'just the same five archetypes over and over again', as is so often said - but they tend to be very high-concept, very clearly-defined, as if every character needed to be pitched to a board of directors in a 60-second presentation. "So, this elf girl...she's naive, she's sweet, she's innocent - but her innocence results in her summoning demons. This guy - he's nuts! Russian accent, very loud, very enthusiastic, hates evil, thinks his rat's talking to him."

I think this nails it. BioWare characters are designed for maximum impact, and sometimes it works really well - Wrex, Minsc, HK-47, Tali, etc. The problem is that as effective as this approach can be in creating memorable characters, it's not enough to create truly deep or interesting ones. Like much else that is endemic to BioWare's design, it provides a good deal of colour and novelty, but not too much to sink one's teeth into. Not that there aren't exceptions to this (Mordin, Sten, Jaheira), but they are pretty rare, and, it seems, almost exist for the sole purpose of compensating for the lack of real depth in all the other characters.

I do have to say I disagree - at least a little - with the world design. Mass Effect, at least the first one, actually has a very fleshed out world, despite making very little sense from a scientific perspective - it's clear much effort went into fleshing out the backstory, the different aliens, some of the planets (though there's definitely a few Hat Planets in there), etc. Dragon Age's setting also isn't fundamentally awful - stuff like the Black City, Orzammar, and the Tevinter Imperium showed lots of promise, but unfortunately all that interesting stuff was largely ignored in favour of the boring, generic Ferelden high fantasy dross.

I think the big difference between "BioWare Lore" and "Obsidian/Black Isle Lore" is that whereas the lore in BioWare games is something in the background, something that only rears its head in the case of the occasional character design, Obsidian's directly influences just about every facet of the game - it's a show, don't tell approach to storytelling. We don't read about the Boneyard in a codex entry, we go there and see it for ourselves after hearing about it from other NPCs in the game world, and as a result we understand it all the better. The lore in Fallout isn't fundamentally deeper and more interesting than Mass Effect's (though it is certainly more original), it's a matter of actually capitalising on that lore and providing an interesting game world with interesting characters; in this respect BioWare usually fail.