Gordon Freeman to Remain Mute

[Kolosus]

You should try watching 'Freemans Mind'. Put's you into the thoughts of Gordon while he plays through the first game. There's currently 24 episodes



1.8 million views

 

[ntw3001]

I hear a lot of people talking about Dr. Freeman as an empty vessel to put yourself in. If that's true then he wouldn't have a face. A faceless character such as Bioshock's character or even someone like Master Chief are much easier to imagine as oneself. Valve have clearly given him a face, despite never seeing it whilst playing. And as much as they might want you to project yourself into the character, you are still going to be a bespectacled guy with a beard. If you feel that you are Gordon Freeman when you play, that's fine but I must agree with people who think it's not the best method of doing things. I feel the same way about your ability to run into a corner, crouch and hide while people are still talking to you as if you were right in front of them. Sure you never leave your perspective, but it certainly is immersion breaking as all hell. As much as Gabe Newell might think they should stick to their guns, it seems archaic and lazy from my perspective.

When I talk about such things I'm not talking about roleplaying. I'm not interested in pretending to be the character. It's more the case that not having one's behaviour scripted is the entire point of making a game rather than a film. Also, there's the fun aspect. Exploring Black Mesa East, looking at things while Eli and Dr. Kleiner are talking to you, is entertaining. Sitting back in front of a cutscene, arms folded, waiting to be allowed to play is not fun. Navigating dialogue options to hurry the cutscene along is less fun than that. Not that there's no space for this kind of storytelling at all, but it's certainly not appropriate for it to be the industry standard method.

And to those who think Freeman's lack of characterisation is 'lazy': Why would it be easier to construct a workable story around an almost completely blank character than to slap together a bunch of space marine cliches and call it a day?

 

[Bato]

VIDEO GAMES ARE NOT THE SAME AS MOVIES!

WHY oh F***ing why can so many people get the idea through their heads that Gordon Freeman is DELIBERATELY left an empty shell so that he is easier to inhabit.

How games do it: Give the illusion that you ARE the protagonist so you can more deeply immerse in the world

The more voice acting you give your protagonist, the more automatic actions, the LESS CONTROL you give the player, the more if feels like they are just a director ordering an actor around. If you don't FEEL that you ARE the character in the story then the game has failed in doing the one things games can do and that movies/books cannot.

What this man said.

Giving him things to say just gives him a personality, the way the game it set up is pretty much: you give him the personality you want.

One reason I like Freeman's Mind, it's Ross giving Freeman the cynical, neurotic, paranoid, and delusional personality Ross felt the silent protagonist would have. And it's funny.

 

[Flame Sama]

I don't mind the silence...but I think one word at the end of the trilogy would wrap it up perfectly.

 

[King Kupofried]

What would Gordon say at this point? There's not really a lot left to tell you, most of his dialogue would just be various forms of "Okay, I'll go to point X through area Y" which would make him seem more like a drone than anything. Any attempts to try and reinforce any underlaying messages or goals using him would probably result in the player rolling their eyes and going "Yes, I know, that was the point of the last two episodes. That's what [Insert Character name] just told me." both of which seem much more damaging to the ever so precious 'immersion'; and I can just feel deep down it would just be a chance to hear him chime up every few minutes to remind us "Hurry! We have to get to [Area name] before [Disaster]!" We know Gordon at this point, we don't need to learn any more about him by hearing him speak, we feel we know him because we portray our good values on him, and occasionally our desires to break open skulls to reach the delicious..delicious brains.. it gives him a personality even if it's just in our own minds.

 

[Snicks]

I personally would love to see Gordon throw some sign language in there, put some subtitles for it so everyone knows what he is saying. That would be awesome.

Gordon can't use sign language, his hands are always full of gun.

OT: If the series wasn't already four games long I'd agree that Gordon should have a voice. But since he's long been established as a silent protagonist it would be weird to change it now.

Also, the beauty of gaming is that you can still tell a brilliant story without having to have the main character speak. Look at Bioshock, the main protagonist there has no voice, no appearance, pretty much no background beyond "brought up in a lab" and the game still has a brilliant story.

Gordon Freeman is only there to give the other characters in the game a name to call you by, he isn't a character, he's a plot device.

 

[Hazy]

One idea I had for you to indicated Gordon to say Yes or No is quite simply to nod your head by looking up and down, or shake your head by looking side to side quickly. Circular gaze "gesture" could indicate... well what would you think if you saw someone do that, rolling their eyes, they don't like the question.

I use the gesture all the time in online games where I forgot my mic, easier to look up and down enthusiastically than look for the hot-key for yes or no.

I actually like this, it gives a feeling of control and personality you just don't get with a hot-key response. The nod speed reflects your enthusiasm and so on, even if the NPC may not even register that enthusiasm, you get the feeling you are expressing your opinions, not just the feelings of a character in the game.

And yes, I realise that is exactly how Alyx and Dog communicate, one speaking and the other depending on gestures.

Had they implemented a feature similar to this, I might have been a bit more accepting of the Gordon's personality = Your personality scenario.
Especially since it opens new avenues for the NPCs to interact with a Gordon that feels more like your own.

Even if it does mean you'll be doing thing X for reason Y, it gives you a greater sense that you have a say in your journey.

 

[wildpeaks]

You should try watching 'Freemans Mind'. Put's you into the thoughts of Gordon while he plays through the first game. There's currently 24 episodes



1.8 million views

The two main derivative series Barney's Mind [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aGgO8O6JuM8&feature=PlayList&p=8906695BE1FCF060&playnext_from=PL&index=0&playnext=1] (for Blue Shift, 21 videos, the serie is finished) and Shepard's Mind [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GNaJX6gOYMA&feature=PlayList&p=2651186EC0769CCB&playnext_from=PL&index=1&playnext=2] (for Opposing Force, 18 videos so far) are pretty good too, there is even an hilarious crossover episode at some point

 

[Fightgarr]

When I talk about such things I'm not talking about roleplaying. I'm not interested in pretending to be the character. It's more the case that not having one's behaviour scripted is the entire point of making a game rather than a film. Also, there's the fun aspect. Exploring Black Mesa East, looking at things while Eli and Dr. Kleiner are talking to you, is entertaining. Sitting back in front of a cutscene, arms folded, waiting to be allowed to play is not fun. Navigating dialogue options to hurry the cutscene along is less fun than that. Not that there's no space for this kind of storytelling at all, but it's certainly not appropriate for it to be the industry standard method.

And to those who think Freeman's lack of characterisation is 'lazy': Why would it be easier to construct a workable story around an almost completely blank character than to slap together a bunch of space marine cliches and call it a day?

It appears, to me, to be far easier to take the mute route. Marine cliches would involve actually writing dialogue for the character and getting a voice actor to do them. The writers have made no part of the story change thanks to the fact that Dr. Freeman is mute, it's just simply there. A big glaring mute problem.

As far as what you said about cutscenes, though: maybe then Valve should innovate a way to create immersive cutscenes. Right now I don't believe that the ability to ignore all dialogue whilst you look around the room is a: immersive at all and b: fun at all. If Valve feel that cutscenes are too much like a movie, then find a way to make them a game. If this was already their goal and the move-around cutscenes are their solution, then they have indeed come up with a poor solution to the problem.

 

[wildpeaks]

VIDEO GAMES ARE NOT THE SAME AS MOVIES!

WHY oh F***ing why can so many people get the idea through their heads that Gordon Freeman is DELIBERATELY left an empty shell so that he is easier to inhabit.

How games do it: Give the illusion that you ARE the protagonist so you can more deeply immerse in the world

The more voice acting you give your protagonist, the more automatic actions, the LESS CONTROL you give the player, the more if feels like they are just a director ordering an actor around. If you don't FEEL that you ARE the character in the story then the game has failed in doing the one things games can do and that movies/books cannot.

What this man said.

Giving him things to say just gives him a personality, the way the game it set up is pretty much: you give him the personality you want.

Well it depends: even if I like the silent Freeman too (or more exactly, I'm used to it, so suddendly having a voice would feel really strange), giving him a voice might not prevent the player from identifying with the character: you take Shepard (from Mass Effect, not Half Life's Adrian Shepard ) for example, I think you'll find players identify with whatever character they picked, yet he/she speaks a lot, so it's not a sine qua non condition imho.

 

[Treblaine]

You might want to look at Alpha Protocol. I believe they had you select a tone of voice and the dialogue. I'm not sure. Haven't heard much on the game in a while.

And for GTA, the missions are canon. Not your mindless killing rampages. Besides, what if you, the player, never go on said rampages? The story would be REALLY fucked up. GTA keeps its story and its sandbox violence separate, for the most part. And it works.

Well while I guess I can understand how one would see sandbox and cutscenes are separate... I don't think that is an acceptable solution, that dichotomy causes the game to lose focus. The more separate the cutscenes and gameplay seem from each other the more pointless and irrelevant they are to each other. The cutscenes are more than just "quest intros", they are characterisation, explaining motives, expanding on the Liberty City mythos and at the same time entertaining. Why sit through cutscenes if anything Nico says or does in them is irrelevant once I get into the sandbox.

I like to think that Nico is insane, try playing GTA with that in mind, that all that Nico says and does is to rationalise this crazy personality in his head who thinks this world that is so very real to him... is just a game.

And you can always depend on gamers to treat a game like a game. I mean have you EVER knocked over a pedestrian in GTA? What did you do, keep driving on? Reverse back over them in sadistic curiosity? I mean how many people on causing a road traffic accident stop and dial 911 to call the ambulance then if the police come let them arrest you?

Oh, and I heard about Alpha Protocol only it doesn't interest me so much as I see it as just another futile step in the direction of "just like a movie, only you're the director" you are still playing RTS with their personality but with more micromanaged control, you can order them what to say and how to say it, but this just makes you more detached. You aren't expressing YOURSELF naturally, you're just playing Spielberg/Scorcese. It won't feel like YOU.

I'm not saying it won't be interesting, hell top down RTS games are interesting to spite how detached you are from the action compared to an FPS game. I'm just saying it won't be all that immersive and what I seek in games is a world I can really feel like I am in, not just observing.

And even RTS war-sims like the command and conquer series they are able to get you to connect by, again, utilising a Silent Protagonist. See you are given orders and spoken directly to sometimes yet you never respond. When you order troops around at the click of a button they say "roger, sir" directly to YOU. Makes you feel like a general.

Now if you are playing the invisible commander they could have given you a really cool voice to say things like, I don't know, "destroy the enemy positions, take no prisoners". It would have been 'cool' but when the soldiers in the game respond to those orders, they aren't responding to you, they're responding to that voice. That's just another degree of separation from the game, you don't feel like you are controlling the conflict, you are just controlling someone who in turn commands it.

 

[SextusMaximus]

Good, while speech can let us get to know a character more, more often it's lets us hate him.

 

[Gladion]

le snip

Yes, I'm being regularly answered that way, but I don't think it works. I mean - sure, I can answer for myself instead of Gordon answering, but that doesn't change Alyx' mood, she can't hear me. I could say "I love you" or "shut your ass, *****", she'd still answer "huh, my dad told me you're the quiet type".
Same for actions. I could theoratically do whatever I want, but that does not change jack shit. When Alyx and Gordon are trapped in a room together and the scientists try to figure a way to open that room, I could either stand still or try to hit Alyx' face with the crowbar. I'd still have to wait for the event to be triggered.

I don't even ask for the story to change. It'd just be nice if any of my actions were at least recognized by the others, a simple "whoa" if I ran at them with my gun in their face would be enough.

Anyway, if a story is well written, you usually are in the same mood as the main character, so that should not happen.
With the current state of technology, I think the Half-Life system of storytelling just does not work.

 

[Brian Hendershot]

I'm glad he remains mute. It's refreshing from the annoying banter that most action heroes have these days.

I wouldn't mind if he had like just ONE line at the end of the game. Just like one word. Of course I wouldn't mind Half Life 2 Episode 3 coming out sometime before I die, but thats wishful thinking.

 

[Ryokai]

Gordon Freeman is the player. By not seeing him in a cutscene or having himspeak, creates more immersion. And in the story he is not mute. It's up to you to decide what exactly he said. The other characters seem to understand him agreeing, greeting them, etc. He is as silent as your imagination makes him.

 

[SnootyEnglishman]

While the idea is a possible i don't think Gordon would do so well with a voice after he's already been well establish as a Silent protagonist. It might take away all of the fan-love and many jokes about him.

 

[Eleima]

I almost can't believe I'm saying this, but... Gordon Freeman *has* to remain mute, otherwise he just isn't Gordon Freeman. Am I a purist? Perhaps...

 

[Doc Cannon]

I like it that he remains mute, and that you always watch "cutscenes" in first person. Giving him a voice would ruin it for me.

 

[willsham45]

The thing is don't fix what is not broken...We have all...scratch that, most of us have all fallen in love with the half life games and it works, and it is different...strangely it has not been used as extensively third person cut screens.
But ye...can you honestly think half life would have been any more fun if the free man spoke back...or if they changed that.
You are gorgon, you know as much as he is told unlike master chief who knows everything more than you telling you what to do.
It just makes it a more emeritus game.

 

[ninjajoeman]

Oh i just imagined myself saying stuff that gordon would say...I get the responses too ironically.