Forums » General Gaming

What we love about who we play

    • 700 posts
    January 7, 2016 11:53 PM EST

    I'm glad you shared, Shy. Jake the Orc sounds like a solid dude, I'd go out hunting vampires with him. Of course, I might just end up playing a support role while he trucks through the enemies if he's as fierce as you say. Still, it would be a sight to see. 

    • 404 posts
    January 8, 2016 12:00 AM EST

    thanks man, I am playing Borderlands 2 from the Handsome Collection right now, and I am using Krieg as my guy. his name is Wulfe, as a inside reference/joke to the blog.

    • 700 posts
    January 8, 2016 12:06 AM EST

    When I used to play Borderlands 2 with my friends, one of them would always play Krieg. The guy is just so ridiculous if you perk him correctly. There were times when I was one of four players taking on a group of enemies and Krieg would murderstomp everyone before the rest of us had a chance to even get a kill. 

    So yeah, Krieg is a good choice of character. Have fun playing :)

    • 404 posts
    January 8, 2016 12:16 AM EST

    thanks man. my first character was Axton named ShyGuy, I played as Roland in BL 1 as Jake.

    • 321 posts
    January 8, 2016 12:28 AM EST

    Man I remembered my OP 8 playthrough as Gaige in Borderlands 2, opened a box and I got one of the most powerful pistols in the game from a CARDBOARD BOX.

    Best RNG moment ever.

    • 404 posts
    January 8, 2016 12:32 AM EST

    awesome.

    • 1595 posts
    January 8, 2016 6:45 AM EST

    I will get inundated with 100+ emails a day because Ning seems to think I authored nearly every topic on the site.

     Ning isn't the smartest cat or the most helpful cat but we love her all the same, no?

    The first game like that to come to mind is Gears of War just because I've spent so much time playing it and so much time on their forums, observing people drawing comparisons between themselves and the characters. For Gears' protagonists, you have the brooding and strong silent type, the outspoken smartass, the jock, and the sensitive best friend to the brooding fellow. It's easier to then say, "Hey, I like that character because he shares a quality I do!", because that quality is his entire character.

    A brighter mind than mine might know why that's the case, why those personality-archetypal characters appeal to us but there is no doubt that we find them compelling. Any thoughts as to why they speak to us so strongly?

    I only ever played the first Gears of War but when I heard Karen Traviss was writing for GoW I very nearly jumped back into the series. I was a big fan of SW: Republic Commando and that game had a similar cast: the sensitive one, the gruff one, the smart ass etc. I jumped into Traviss' Republic Commando novels without hesitation. That was many years ago mind, but I remember them fondly.

    Personally, I tend to relate to the soft spoken, loyal characters who get thrown headfirst into something they want no part of. Alistair of Dragon Age, Isaac Clarke of Dead Space, Terrence Sweetwater of Battlefield: Bad Company (this game also has the caricature characters).

    That's interesting you put Isaac Clark in that list. I played DS (scared the bejeezus out of me) but I can't recall getting a vibe on his character traits. Having said that I haven't played the sequels so am at a disadvantage. As for Alistair was he your favourite DA character?

    Hmm. I try to create characters that are grey, characters that, while they may weight to one side of the morality scale, don’t tip it over. Which is why I’m glad you brought up that point about playing assassins and vampires, the dark kinds of characters who can tend to be a bit bland. The MURDERDEATHKILL types are last on my list of characters I enjoy playing, but that’s just me.

    Me too. I find them to make a nice distraction or scratch an itch but I don't tend to put much time into them. I'm not saying I can't see why people find them rewarding, referring particularly to  those who have somehow gotten into the head of their depraved character, but for me that level of understanding is a really tall order.

    This is a hard question! Perhaps I should answer my own questions before asking others. I keep coming back to Isaac from Dead Space which is…an uncommon answer? I just admire his resolve despite being silent in the first game. He was an engineer that repurposed mining tools in a life or death situation. I respect that. A nerd that got thrown into a situation more fit for the typical Shepard/Master Chief survived with his smarts and will to live.

    That's a very positive and thoughtful insight Liege. What is the talky and personable Isaac of the sequels like?

    I think I just accidentally answered this in part in the above question, but it’s fine because I’ve tried to integrate facets of other characters into my own personality. I think it’s important to note that I’ve done this because for a very long time, I lacked a solid sense of self. My social intelligence, though far better now, was very minimal for most of my life. Only in this last year have I really improved in that respect. So I would mimic parts of these characters that represented who I wanted to be. Basically trying on different hats to see what fit and felt right. 

    That is fascinating and it sounds a bit like how I was. I still have abysmal social intelligence as it relates to interactions rather than morality but I think there are parallels there. Instead of video game characters I latched on to rpg characters from the likes of D&D etc. I started questioning everything and spent a ridiculous amount of time trying to find a religion I could fit into.

    I like to think that it was that I had too great a sense of self and that the world around me was alien to my nature and so I needed to break it down into manageable chunks  it helps me sleep at night.

    Let’s see…one thing that stuck with me was Mordin’s lighthearted everything. I absolutely adore Mordin and I wanted so much to just allow myself to be like him, to take everything in stride and take care of my business when the situation demanded it. I’m not as quick or as articulate as Mordin but he was definitely an inspiration for me moving in that direction.

    Mordin is the absolute best and I am so glad I read that. Best. Character. Ever  I think one could do a lot worse than emulating Mordin. He was always questioning his actions and decisions and that was a level of introspection rarely seen in a game. Question everything, even yourself. A burden to creatures of morals like us and sometimes I envy those who go through life blaming others and never stop to think of their own culpability. To be like them would be a relief.

    This generally extends to IRL too, where I will adopt qualities that I admire in others. It might not be to the same extent, but I do constantly try to improve myself. It's possible that the qualities I've adopted are qualities that were already in me or that exist in all people, but simply weren't nurtured until I gave them the proper attention. Things like rational discourse, genuine empathy, charitability, organizational skills, and even my sense of humor. Things that I observed, admired, and adopted. 

    May I ask why those qualities weren't nurtured? It sounds as if you've had it rough dude.

    So you genuinely believe that those qualities are more of an outside influence than something which stems from within? It's a deep discussion, nature versus nurture, and smarter minds then mine will probably be able to provide some fantastic insights into the topic, but I am quite convinced that a person is attracted to the qualities they already possess. It could just be a case that those qualities seem at odds with the people around them or never get the encouragement they need to grow. That leads to self-reflection and questioning and that feeling of being out of place and not fitting in.

    • 700 posts
    January 8, 2016 12:40 PM EST

    ​A brighter mind than mine might know why that's the case, why those personality-archetypal characters appeal to us but there is no doubt that we find them compelling. Any thoughts as to why they speak to us so strongly?

    I only ever played the first Gears of War but when I heard Karen Traviss was writing for GoW I very nearly jumped back into the series. I was a big fan of SW: Republic Commando and that game had a similar cast: the sensitive one, the gruff one, the smart ass etc. I jumped into Traviss' Republic Commando novels without hesitation. That was many years ago mind, but I remember them fondly.

    ​I think their appeal might just have to do with the fact that they're so immediately relatable. Being the protagonists, we're already on their side when we load up the game. There's an innate desire to see them succeed and an expectation that they will. It might also be the case that characters are designed in very superficial ways for easy engagement. The characters in Gears lack any real depth and all effectively fill a role that is usually only one facet of someone's personality rather than the entire personality. If that's the case, then understanding the character becomes a simple task and we usually end up relating to all of the characters.

    There are blank-slate characters that allow us to assign our own personality and build from the ground up.

    There are fully developed characters that we relate to, get annoyed by, love, and mourn.

    And then there are characters who are so strongly archetypal in one direction that it's almost impossible not to find some way to relate to at least one, though it rarely goes further than that. It could be as simple as "Baird was a sarcastic shithead just now. Oh hey, I was a sarcastic shit head today too! Baird is an alright guy."

    Does that make sense? I hope it does. Personality psychology isn't really my strong suit and it's a hazy grey field anyway.

    I don't honestly know what parts she wrote and I'm not at all familiar with her writing, so I hesitate to give my full recommendation to give Gears a go. I say that if you do want to play it, play co-op.

    That's interesting you put Isaac Clark in that list. I played DS (scared the bejeezus out of me) but I can't recall getting a vibe on his character traits. Having said that I haven't played the sequels so am at a disadvantage. As for Alistair was he your favourite DA character?

    ​I think it's fair to say he's my favorite. I've only ever completed the first game so the roster of characters I have to choose from is about a third of what it is for most people. I have restarted DA2 about three times and never even made it to the expedition quest any of those times. I think the moment I really started liking Alistair was when he confessed that he was royalty. The humility, the coping with vulnerability through humor, the general admiration of those more experienced and confident - it all adds up to someone I see myself in. Also, here's an amusing Alistair-related picture.​​

    That's a very positive and thoughtful insight Liege. What is the talky and personable Isaac of the sequels like?

    ​​I can only speak as far as Dead Space 2, but he feels a lot more human. He speaks a lot more and the things he says are believable. He's deeply scarred from the first game and it definitely shows, but he comes more into his own. He's still scared and he doesn't hesitate to show it, but he does answer the call to action and powers through because others are counting on him. He effectively becomes the expert in the situation, the person that others can look to for his experience with the Necromorphs and general expertise with technology that allows them to get as far as they do. He also swears a lot. A lot. Which, duh.

    He was always questioning his actions and decisions and that was a level of introspection rarely seen in a game. Question everything, even yourself.

    ​Precisely! I can't think about Mordin without getting the most bitter-sweet choked up smile. ​

    May I ask why those qualities weren't nurtured? It sounds as if you've had it rough dude.

    ​I don't know that I really had it any rougher than any other child/teenager to be honest. At least not from an outside perspective. Most of my turmoil has been internal which makes sense considering I'm a shy introvert with social anxiety (though most of the SA is gone now) and I've always internalized things. I think part of the reason these things weren't nurtured was because I spent so much of my youth stuck in varying degrees of depression which I never sought treatment for. None of these things really mattered. All I could focus on was my day-to-day. I had only a few long term goals but they never came to fruition through some combination of the normal teenager behavior of rebellion and boredom, and significant dips in my mood that convinced me I wasn't worth achieving those goals.

    Because I never sought any professional help and because I only started reaching out my friends for help relatively recently, I really only started developing myself five years ago. Only late this year have I learned the relearned the value of empathy and pulled myself out of what seemed like a unending spiral of misery. I do want to note that I choose to speak candidly about these things (though I haven't given an exhaustive description) not because I want sympathy or attention, but because I find value in the ability to be honest about myself. It's the only way I was able to change in the first place.

    So you genuinely believe that those qualities are more of an outside influence than something which stems from within? It's a deep discussion, nature versus nurture, and smarter minds then mine will probably be able to provide some fantastic insights into the topic, but I am quite convinced that a person is attracted to the qualities they already possess. It could just be a case that those qualities seem at odds with the people around them or never get the encouragement they need to grow. That leads to self-reflection and questioning and that feeling of being out of place and not fitting in.


    ​In all of my experience, whenever something is thought to be nature or nurture, it's been a combination of both. "Nature vs nurture" is a bit of a misnomer in that respect since they're not really fighting for dominance and it's rarely (if ever) one or the other. But I agree with what you say, I think it makes sense. I've always felt out of place and never really identified with groups or ideas, and like Mordin, I have always questioned myself. That level of questioning often manifested itself in the form of doubt, blame, and self-destruction, where I would build myself up only to tear it all back down again.

    For a very long time, those qualities I listed may have been in my nature, but lacked the necessary nurturing to truly blossom. That's why I began imitating characters that I admired and that's why I really only started coming into my own after making deep connections with people who were very much like me. So on one hand, I made the conscious choice to improve myself in those ways (nurture), but I was drawn to those particular attributes because they were an innate part of my being (nature). ​

    That is fascinating and it sounds a bit like how I was. I still have abysmal social intelligence as it relates to interactions rather than morality but I think there are parallels there. Instead of video game characters I latched on to rpg characters from the likes of D&D etc. I started questioning everything and spent a ridiculous amount of time trying to find a religion I could fit into.
    I like to think that it was that I had too great a sense of self and that the world around me was alien to my nature and so I needed to break it down into manageable chunks it helps me sleep at night.

    Ugh, I know the alien feeling too. Sometimes I still have trouble figuring out if I'm the alien or they are. How did the religious search go for you by the way? I tried religion too when I was younger, though it was nondenominational so I guess it would just be called spirituality

    • 700 posts
    January 8, 2016 1:13 PM EST

    Correction:  HERE is the amusing Alistair picture. Or was it humorous? 

    • 1595 posts
    January 8, 2016 7:43 PM EST

    • 1595 posts
    January 8, 2016 8:27 PM EST

    It might also be the case that characters are designed in very superficial ways for easy engagement. The characters in Gears lack any real depth and all effectively fill a role that is usually only one facet of someone's personality rather than the entire personality. If that's the case, then understanding the character becomes a simple task and we usually end up relating to all of the characters.

    Maybe if all those disparate parts were bolted together instead of 3 or 4 superficial characters we'd have one complex character? That could be the psychology behind squad immersion - the player feels like the other members of the squad are extensions of his personality?

    Does that make sense? I hope it does. Personality psychology isn't really my strong suit and it's a hazy grey field anyway.

    I don't honestly know what parts she wrote and I'm not at all familiar with her writing, so I hesitate to give my full recommendation to give Gears a go. I say that if you do want to play it, play co-op.

    Perfect sense. We can empathise with Baird.

    As for co-op, allow me to reintroduce myself: Hi, I'm Phil. I'm a bit of a misanthrope and I don't play well with others

    I think it's fair to say he's my favorite. I've only ever completed the first game so the roster of characters I have to choose from is about a third of what it is for most people. I have restarted DA2 about three times and never even made it to the expedition quest any of those times. I think the moment I really started liking Alistair was when he confessed that he was royalty. The humility, the coping with vulnerability through humor, the general admiration of those more experienced and confident - it all adds up to someone I see myself in. Also, here's an amusing Alistair-related picture.​​

    That picture is funny. He's vulnerable is our Alistair but I think his way of expressing and coping with that is quite admirable. If you are similar to Alistair then you haven't done too much wrong as far as I see it.

    I can't say I am a huge DA fan and never played number 2 either, but Morrigan was the one who left the biggest impression on me.

    He effectively becomes the expert in the situation, the person that others can look to for his experience with the Necromorphs and general expertise with technology that allows them to get as far as they do. He also swears a lot. A lot. Which, duh.

    I'm a bit of a swearer too and it gets me in trouble quite often. I don't even have necromorphs as an excuse  

    I do want to note that I choose to speak candidly about these things (though I haven't given an exhaustive description) not because I want sympathy or attention, but because I find value in the ability to be honest about myself. It's the only way I was able to change in the first place.

    Thank you for sharing Liege and your note has been noted  You say you learnt the value of empathy. Does that mean you had too much of it and tried turning it off, or that you focussed yourself on relating to those who wouldn't cause you as much pain?

    There was an Elementary quote from an episode I only watched the other day form Sherlock which I really liked and it came at such a coincidental time that it was uncanny:

    One of the things I've gained from our collaboration is the working definition of the word, "friendship". Friendship, I've come to believe, is most accurately defined as two people moving towards the best aspects of one another. It is a relationship of mutual benefit, mutual gain. Another thing I've learned is that my isolationist tendencies are decidedly not my best quality. I am not a better person because of a lack of connection.

    That and a few other things has made me think long and hard about my definition of the word.

    In all of my experience, whenever something is thought to be nature or nurture, it's been a combination of both. "Nature vs nurture" is a bit of a misnomer in that respect since they're not really fighting for dominance and it's rarely (if ever) one or the other. But I agree with what you say, I think it makes sense. I've always felt out of place and never really identified with groups or ideas, and like Mordin, I have always questioned myself. That level of questioning often manifested itself in the form of doubt, blame, and self-destruction, where I would build myself up only to tear it all back down again.

    Very nicely answered. Where does all that doubt and blame come from?

    How did the religious search go for you by the way?

    Poorly. They're all full of shit. I learned organised religion isn't for me and found myself along the way so it all paid. The closest I come to religion could be seen as paganism although I reject a lot of that as horseshit too.

    It's funny as I always distrust scientists who are also devout - it's like trying to trust a dentist who has bad teeth. Yet I cannot help seeing something deeper than chance when I delve into creation theories myself.

    • 700 posts
    January 10, 2016 1:43 PM EST

    Maybe if all those disparate parts were bolted together instead of 3 or 4 superficial characters we'd have one complex character? That could be the psychology behind squad immersion - the player feels like the other members of the squad are extensions of his personality?

    This was my thinking. That put together, we'd have a character of reasonable depth. Each character as they are now, are more or less splinters of a personality. We're all sarcastic at some point, sensitive, angry, and fun-loving. The squad is just a tangible representation of those qualities.

    I can't say I am a huge DA fan and never played number 2 either, but Morrigan was the one who left the biggest impression on me.

    Ya know, I could never get into Morrigan! Almost every single choice I made in my first playthrough (where I always play as myself), she disapproved of. I always thought she was a snake. Pouty, manipulative, and looking for a method to screw someone over so she could get her way. But I guess that is a pretty large impression to leave, regardless of how good it is.

    Any specific thoughts on her?

    You say you learnt the value of empathy. Does that mean you had too much of it and tried turning it off, or that you focussed yourself on relating to those who wouldn't cause you as much pain?

    More the former. I used to be a grateful, gushy, emotional ball of mush that redefined wearing one's heart on one's sleeve. After an unfortunate incident, I completely shut down and stopped feeling, for my own good. I wrote emotions off as evil and became bitter and resentful. Since that time, I hadn't made any new friends until this year where I was able to make myself vulnerable again and learn that that's not how I want to live. With making myself vulnerable came the lesson of expressing empathy, something that's necessary for a healthy friendship to grow. At least, it is in my eyes. That's the kind of friendship I want, so I had to work on relearning my own emotions and how to express those in a healthy, supportive, and productive way.

    One of the things I've gained from our collaboration is the working definition of the word, "friendship". Friendship, I've come to believe, is most accurately defined as two people moving towards the best aspects of one another. It is a relationship of mutual benefit, mutual gain. Another thing I've learned is that my isolationist tendencies are decidedly not my best quality. I am not a better person because of a lack of connection.

    Love it, love everything about it. It's so spot on.

    Very nicely answered. Where does all that doubt and blame come from?

    It's hard to pinpoint any one reason, it's been with me for as long as I can remember. I think this may just be one of those instances of nature. I was just born with a brain predisposed to depression and anxiety, so I have to make the best of it.

    Poorly. They're all full of shit. I learned organised religion isn't for me and found myself along the way so it all paid. The closest I come to religion could be seen as paganism although I reject a lot of that as horseshit too.

    It's funny as I always distrust scientists who are also devout - it's like trying to trust a dentist who has bad teeth. Yet I cannot help seeing something deeper than chance when I delve into creation theories myself.


    That sounds very similar to the position some of my friends hold. They've forgone organized religion for personal and private spiritualities, distrust the extremes, and have a constant internal dialogue about meaning, specifically related to creation theories. I guess it's one of those things that never really goes away. The skeptical mind is going to question, conclude, then question that conclusion, and continue that pattern indefinitely. I figure it's just as hard to trust the religious figurehead that says his or her god is the one true god as it is to trust the scientist that says his or her theory is "proven". Thanks for sharing that, though, Phil. I know that historically on this site, such questions have incited brawls and it's always a risk to bring up such topics.