One of my main interests is history, and so I'm used to a bunch of actors in a very complicated net of actions. As the great Steven Runciman ecplicitly wrote in the introduction of his book about the Sicilian Vesper, if you cannot deal with a lot of persons, stay away and read a novel (but not necessarily War and Peace perhaps).
A lot of games (and books, but in books you have a lot more chances to add interesting psychological stuff) have boringly similar stories. Because it is so easy to create a story with a main character in focus. Who becomes the leader of x, y and most important z. Because he/she is so special. Oh my.
So, it's maybe easier to make a game without any important character, but it's more complicated to make a game with a bunch of decisive characters than with one main character.
I don't blame the developers of games really for this. There are many limits for the devs because of certain restrictions, rules and needs to be considered. And then the poor devs face a lot of personal bias in addition. I don't like predefined characters for example. I don't want a main character with a strong story. I want to make and play my own character (one of the reasons I don't like The Witcher), but I want to deal with strong NPC characters.
Last edited by geala; 11/09/17 07:18 AM.
