In the lines whereI talked about emotions yesterday, there is a contrasting idea that I wanted to share with you.
In one of our narrative meetings with Nico Saraintaris and Sebas Gioseffi, Nico mentioned that there is a character in hisPixel Pulpfor which he receives a lot of hate.
There is a very strong phenomenon of identification in video games that, although it may appear in some books, is very rare and I wouldn't know for certain if it happens in the same way.
Players, having agency in the game, do not create a barrier between the protagonist and themselves .
This is reinforced by the concept of avatars, digital versions of oneself.
This identification, or lack of separation, generates a very strong negative feeling when the character in the game acts in ways that clash with the player's intentions.
It is enough for the character one is controlling to say something one disagrees with for a very strong negative emotion to arise.
This bothers the traditional writer.
And rightfully so, this greatly limits the type of character one can develop.
Especially in a time where cancel culture is so strong.
In a way, it makes us feel like we are obligated to create characters that reflect the opinions of the majority.
Or if they don't, that they are cute and sympathetic "underdogs".
We can also ignore this and see what happens.
Nico did that, and he received backlash from some players.
The feeling it leaves behind is not nice at all, but it is clearly a not very good consequence of interactivity.
Have you felt this? Do you have a go-to way to approach this problem?
Top comments (0)