Silent Verses Voiced Protagonist in RPGs

A lot of the discussion surrounding silent verses voiced protagonists are about which one is superior to the other and not what I believe it should be about which is, did the game use either protagonist type well.

Not saying that no one can talk about which one they prefer over the other. That’s fine. The discussion I am talking about is that people will look at Mass Effect and say that the voiced protagonist hampers the game as it leads to fewer choices. It is true that a voiced protagonist causes that but that isn’t the point. The point isn’t to give the player thousands of choices. It is using Shepard not as a vessel for the player but rather as a filter to what choices are offered. There is a reason for the game to be the way it is because its goal in using a voiced protagonist is different than a silent protagonist, and that is what I want to talk about. Why either are used in the first place. Now I do want to stress this again. This isn’t a discussion on which is better, nor do I intend this to say which is better. I am not trying to convince you which protagonist type is better. You like either type not because you argued your way into that position but because you simply like what it does.

Before we do get into the discussion proper, we have to address that this discussion is mostly talking about RPGs. Because a silent protagonist in non-RPGs is actually silent and it is part of the characterization, while in RPGs it isn’t. It is used mostly to allow the player to be front and center of the game. Just to get that out of the way.

Now to be clear both protagonist types are used for similar reasons but coming from a different direction. Voiced and silent are immersive but in different ways. That is why there is an overlap.

So, silent protagonists are used because:

·         Immersion from being directly in the world

o   The prerequisite for a good silent protagonist is removing you from any prior existence. Because any characterization that you did not enforce yourself removes your ability to be immersed as you are no longer in control. Taking away your agency. Because the point of a silent protagonist is having control over them. You are the player character. The actions you make are the action they make. They conform to you.

·         Modular characterization

o   As opposed to a curated character, modularity is done so that the player is able to characterize their character by the use of general and vague backstories. Allowing the player, a rough estimation of what they are and then leaves the rest up to them to home in on what they think it is. This can be done through options the player selects during creation like Pillars of Eternity, dialogue choice throughout the game, or in reaction to the player’s choices. The reason it is used is because it allows the player to have more control on what their character is like. Instead of the game giving them a character it wants the player to be the character.

·         To offer more choices

o   Silent protagonists’ games are operating on the assumption of what the player wants to do. If the player wants to do x let them do x. If they want to do y let them do y. And so on and so forth. The benefit is the world feels like you are controlling it, but it does remove the agency of the world in favor for the player. What I mean by that is the world can’t have any driving force other than the player. The world can only react to what the player does. No structured story, or anything for that manner, because it can undermine the player. For if there is a carefully crafted plot with twists and turns, loveable and detestable characters, those aspects can force the player to do something they don’t want to do. Those well-made stories can also just be ignored. This offers a lot of freedom but does make everything else, other than the player, a side point. It can’t express itself otherwise it can undermine the player. Thus, these stories have to be extremely pliable for the player. Which often results in the stories for these games to become mostly generic, not that is bad or inherent or required for silent protagonist games. Just that those stories make it easier to provide more choices. A story like Uncharted would be rather poor if the player can do anything. Nathan Drake killing Sully would go against his characterization and backstory, yet if the player can do that it opens up a lot of issues for the story. But it also would make the story less impactful. Because the game is made with the story being the same for all players and so it can focus on delivering that story then having to worry over making each choice as good as any other choice. This is why silent protagonist games utilize generic stories because the player has more freedom in them to do what they want. Just to say, silent protagonist games do have good stories and characters but they aren’t the point. The point is the player’s freedom.

That is ultimately the point of a silent protagonist. It values the player’s agency and ability to do what they want over everything. A game has to ask the question, “But what if the player wants to do x? What would happen?” A good silent protagonist game’s quality is measured on many options the player can choose from and how well the consequences are done.

Voiced protagonists are used because:

·         Immersion from the player character existing prior

o   The immersion is from a character that has existed prior to your input. That is why they are immersive. Because a character that only existed the moment you played is not a person but rather a new entity that entered and started influencing the world. It’s unnatural to say the least. There is no in game acknowledgement the player character every existed that isn’t from the player themselves. For example, the Courier did not exist before. Whoever they were is what the player determines them to be. But as a result, the game can’t acknowledge any of this, only in broad strokes. A vague recognition of your constructed backstory. While voiced protagonists have a backstory that is referenced and used in quests and dialogue. Characters will mention who were before and can use that to make a contrast of what you are now prior from starting the game. Further emphasizing the prior existence of your character. The immersion then comes from that. The only contrast a silent protagonist have been the contrast from the start of the game to the end of the game.

·         The story follows a character, meaning character arcs and characterization

o   Since this is a more curated character actually character arcs and characterizations can be done. Because the game has a protagonist that won’t just suddenly change. You know what and who they are and so the story can be about them as well. It can have a story around a character. There are conflicts with another character, themselves, or any number of character centric stories. While silent protagonist games can have this, it is often not done because it then takes away agency to force the player to act a way they may not want to. Characters like Geralt have stories and motivations that are more meaningful because the story is focused on his character. His emotions, reactions, changes to himself and their effects can have more impact because he existed prior. A silent protagonist can’t have those because if they did it would take away the player’s agency. Incidental a lot of silent protagonist games can feel like they lack themes because of this. Even though they don’t.

·         The choices are informed by the player character or themes

o   The choices in voiced protagonist games are not about what the player wants to do but what the character would do. Because of that it can be used to explore the character or themes of the game. A great example in a non-RPG is Wolfenstein. In New World Order you get to make a choice that is, for all intends and purposes, meaningless. But what it lacks in consequences it gains in themes. Deciding which one of your friends should live or die doesn’t matter as the survivor turns into a robot nazi. All that really changes is you get a different voice when you fight them, but the choice is less literally and more metaphorically. It tells the player that the nazis won’t offer a choice that doesn’t benefit them. Because they don’t care about being honorable, or right, or having mercy. All they care about is their victory and they won’t give you a choice in that matter. Now you may say they could have gotten that point across without making the player choose. The Nazi’s could just say after Blazkowicz chooses one of them that he wouldn’t survive. But to me having the player to choose, to participate makes the choice more meaningful thematically. Because you had to decide who lives or dies then see that it didn’t matter. To feel that agency been false. Which is done again in the sequel New Colossus. Kid Blazkowicz is forced by his father to shoot their dog or get beating up. The player gets to choose to kill the dog or not. The thing is, not shooting still kills the dog. Again, the same outcome. But just like before it has themes dripping from it. The nazi ideology will kill the Jew. All that matters is if you’ll join them or die as well. A test of loyalty. This is what I mean by it being more appropriate. The choices that are offered are informed by the game’s themes. Not by what the player wants to do. Or the choice is informed by the character and what they would do in that situation. The player is just nudging them into a choice. Shepard is a defined character that has their own agency. The player may want Shepard to do something like killing their crewmates whenever, but that would go against their character. So, instead of allowing the player to do whatever the player gets to see Shepard’s character explored. I also need to mention that voiced protagonist games can have consequences for the characters actions and it isn’t all meaningless. I just used Wolfenstein as an example for how a choice can be meaningless but be thematic. Voice protagonist games and having choices and consequences aren’t mutually exclusive. In the Witcher 3, Geralt can make the choice to be a, good or bad, father figure to Ciri and both choices lead to vastly different outcomes. Additionally, another choice can lead to Ciri becoming a Witcher (in name only) or the Empress. Evidently voiced protagonist games can have consequences with a curated character.

Which is the point of a voiced protagonist. To explores the themes, story, or character. The choices are then informed by what the character would likely do. Its choices are meaningful in a different way than a silent protagonist. It is not about the player wanting to do something, but what the character would do and what those choices mean to them. Is it a choice that leads them down to a darker path, or a choice to a brighter path? How does the choice embrace the themes of the story? What does one choice mean to the character verses the other choice? What it lacks in freedom, it gains in a different type of meaning.

Now let’s talk about how some games misuse both types. I want to talk about this because it isn’t as simple as, ‘One good and the other bad.’ They both can be used poorly or well. So, I want to show that with these games.

Skyrim is an example of a silent protagonist used poorly in an RPG. You don’t get to do what you want as a player. Many of the interactions they player wants to do like for example killing certain characters lead to them just crouching on the floor screaming ‘I yield!’ Even killing characters don’t lead anywhere. It doesn’t change quests it locks them off.

Same goes for quests. For example, when you start the quest House of Horrors in Markarth the player doesn’t have any opportunity to do anything else. You are forced to complete the quest like Molag Bal wants. You can’t warn the guy what is happening, or even ask the help of the Vigilant of Stendarr guys, even though you just met one. Skyrim has this in droves.

The use of a silent protagonist isn’t used for allowing the player to do what they want. You are limited only to what the game allows, which is fine if the Dragonborn was a character, but that isn’t what is happening. The only thing you can say that Skyrim gets right with a silent protagonist is that you can easily immerse yourself. But without the other two it seems less important and even more apparent your actions and choices do nothing. This is an example of a silent protagonist done poorly. The reason why you would have one isn’t present in Skyrim.

Skyrim feels like it wants its protagonist to have a character and be someone but fail to make them one. Instead wants to have its cake and eat it to.

Funnily enough, another Bethesda game shows a bad voiced protagonist. Fallout 4’s Vault Survivor is a curated character. They existed before the player took control, they have a backstory outside the player, and have a (supposedly) unique personality.

Now that is fine if the game was only that and supporting elements. But the game isn’t, the game is telling the player to go out and explore and to whatever they wish, but at the same time coercing the player to engage with the main quest. The main character if just played as they are would B-line the main story and ignored everything else that doesn’t require immediate attention like someone is going to die. Yet the game rewards for exploring the world at the main quest’s detriment.

The dialogue also isn’t appropriate to a voice protagonist. The dialogue and choices you get to make are more informed on rewards rather than what the curated character would do. It doesn’t even matter that they were alive before the bombs dropped. They don’t act like they were from that time. It only comes up in main quests and not the rest of the game. Which all of that undermines their character. They don’t really exist in the world they are simply a vessel the player uses to get loot. Which is fine if the game was that, but it clearly wasn’t trying to be just that.

A voiced protagonist and a silent protagonist in RPGs aren’t a matter of which is better or worse, but rather which is used appropriately and how well it is done. If you’re a fan of silent protagonists you can still criticize voiced protagonist, but understand that the game isn’t trying to do what you want it to do. And if you are a fan of voiced protagonists, you can still criticize silent protagonist games. Just understand as well that it isn’t meant for you.

Often times I am frustrated that the discussion isn’t about this, but rather that one is better than another. Which to me never made sense. People like to say silent protagonists are needed to make a good RPG, but that misses the point of role playing. Role playing is playing a role. I imagine people who play D&D don’t just have their character’s suddenly act differently unless there is an explanation for it. The role there is defined by them. They restrict themselves to play a character. The same applies to a voiced protagonist. Just instead of making your own character you are playing someone else’s character. Imagine it like you’re playing a friend’s D&D character, you’re not meant to play how you want to but how your friend’s character would. Because at the end of the day both types are still valid RPGs, just that one is where the player gets to decide to do whatever they want to at any time, and the other where the role is already defined. And if you prefer to decide what your character is that is fine. Just understand that it isn’t less of an RPG just because you’re playing your friend’s D&D character. Because what it may lack in player agency it gains at having a story made for that character.