Why are people so opposed to non human game characters?

[ffxfriek]

Because we don't like being told we're the assholes. The sorts of games that feature this to a noticeable degree aren't trying to make you think, they're brainless enjoyment games, and in these situations a game that actively trys to point out our faults is not going to be well recieved by players.

seconded

 

[hermes]

Because it is easier to humans to relate to humans or anthropomorphized animals. We have years of experience in conveing and identifying emotions and thoughts out of people expresions than to have the same expresivity out of an ant-like creature would requiere a lot of extra work (and wouldn't always work).

Also, we have a lot of experience out of the movies and TV industry in creating relatable mouses and ducks by giving them human features.

With that being said, many RTSs and RPGs have some not-human main characters... so, your point of all games being starred by humans fails.

 

[hermes]

Where does it say that you need to sympathize with a character for them to be the protagonist? You can definitley have a protagonist that you're not meant to sympathize with. MacBeth is a pretty prominent literary protagonist that you aren't really meant to sympathize with. He allows himself to be manipulated and ultimately undoes himself. At no point did I find myself going "Poor MacBeth, awww shucks!"

You don't need to sympathize, but at least understand. Humans are easier to understand to us because we are humans. We have learned since our childhood to understand feelings and guess thoughts through expressions. If your character is a giant butterfly, the only feelings you can figure into it is those you project.

I bet Macbeth would be a far less powerful play if all the actors had cardboard bettle masks on.

 

[IHaveNoCoolness]

Where does it say that you need to sympathize with a character for them to be the protagonist? You can definitley have a protagonist that you're not meant to sympathize with. MacBeth is a pretty prominent literary protagonist that you aren't really meant to sympathize with. He allows himself to be manipulated and ultimately undoes himself. At no point did I find myself going "Poor MacBeth, awww shucks!"

You don't need to sympathize, but at least understand. Humans are easier to understand to us because we are humans. We have learned since our childhood to understand feelings and guess thoughts through expressions. If your character is a giant butterfly, the only feelings you can figure into it is those you project.

I bet Macbeth would be a far less powerful play if all the actors had cardboard bettle masks on.

Fair enough.

And I guess your post answers the OP main questions about the topic. It's a relateability issue. It's easier to relate to those that look like you. But you certainly don't need to sympathize with the character. Nor is every game about humans either. Or even every play, book or movie. Just more of them, because it's easier to start with a known factor. I could be mistaken, but I believe the first plays put on in ancient Greece didn't have human characters and were in fact about the Gods and their stories. Likewise, many religions use ancedotes of human and non-human characters from gods, to demi-gods to make their points. I guess you can argue that these are human-like aliens since they share a form with humans, but the story of Hercules isn't about a man, it's about a half-man half-god.

I think my point was more that there are tons of instances where humans are not the the main reference point for the story telling. Granted, there are probably more examples of humans as the protagonist, but there certainly are plenty of exceptions to this.

Even though the OP was pretty quick to write off cartoony characters, the entire genre of childrens games is dominated with non-human protagonists...

 

[AdamAK]

I think nearly everyone in this topic missed the part where the OP said:

(for the record I am NOT talking about 'cartoony characters' like Spiro, Sonic, Crash Bandicoot or any of them fella's. So overlook all the cartoony ones, instead I am talking about games with a 'serious' tone to them. Also certainly not one of those 'fake non humans' who still looks very, very human. That doesn't count either.)

That means no Jak & Daxter, Sonic, WoW characters, biped aliens strongly resembling humans, et cetera..

Can we also really add RTS games to the list? Quite often the difference between the humans and aliens are not that obvious.

 

[hermes]

Where does it say that you need to sympathize with a character for them to be the protagonist? You can definitley have a protagonist that you're not meant to sympathize with. MacBeth is a pretty prominent literary protagonist that you aren't really meant to sympathize with. He allows himself to be manipulated and ultimately undoes himself. At no point did I find myself going "Poor MacBeth, awww shucks!"

You don't need to sympathize, but at least understand. Humans are easier to understand to us because we are humans. We have learned since our childhood to understand feelings and guess thoughts through expressions. If your character is a giant butterfly, the only feelings you can figure into it is those you project.

I bet Macbeth would be a far less powerful play if all the actors had cardboard bettle masks on.

Fair enough.

And I guess your post answers the OP main questions about the topic. It's a relateability issue. It's easier to relate to those that look like you. But you certainly don't need to sympathize with the character. Nor is every game about humans either. Or even every play, book or movie. Just more of them, because it's easier to start with a known factor. I could be mistaken, but I believe the first plays put on in ancient Greece didn't have human characters and were in fact about the Gods and their stories. Likewise, many religions use ancedotes of human and non-human characters from gods, to demi-gods to make their points. I guess you can argue that these are human-like aliens since they share a form with humans, but the story of Hercules isn't about a man, it's about a half-man half-god.

I think my point was more that there are tons of instances where humans are not the the main reference point for the story telling. Granted, there are probably more examples of humans as the protagonist, but there certainly are plenty of exceptions to this.

Even though the OP was pretty quick to write off cartoony characters, the entire genre of childrens games is dominated with non-human protagonists...

However, most of the "childrens games" feature anthropomorphized animals (think about it... most animals in videogames have hands, opposing thumbs, cloth, expresive eyes and human-like mouths, many don't even have animal specific features). Of course, there are exceptions (Okami), but the OP didn't say all games had human protagonists, but most have.

And the greek mythology is not a good example of "non-humans" main characters. While greek gods are not humans, they certainly look like some. They even have very human defects and characteristics. In all accounts, all greek gods can be seen as idealized, inmortal humans.

 

[IHaveNoCoolness]

Where does it say that you need to sympathize with a character for them to be the protagonist? You can definitley have a protagonist that you're not meant to sympathize with. MacBeth is a pretty prominent literary protagonist that you aren't really meant to sympathize with. He allows himself to be manipulated and ultimately undoes himself. At no point did I find myself going "Poor MacBeth, awww shucks!"

You don't need to sympathize, but at least understand. Humans are easier to understand to us because we are humans. We have learned since our childhood to understand feelings and guess thoughts through expressions. If your character is a giant butterfly, the only feelings you can figure into it is those you project.

I bet Macbeth would be a far less powerful play if all the actors had cardboard bettle masks on.

Fair enough.

And I guess your post answers the OP main questions about the topic. It's a relateability issue. It's easier to relate to those that look like you. But you certainly don't need to sympathize with the character. Nor is every game about humans either. Or even every play, book or movie. Just more of them, because it's easier to start with a known factor. I could be mistaken, but I believe the first plays put on in ancient Greece didn't have human characters and were in fact about the Gods and their stories. Likewise, many religions use ancedotes of human and non-human characters from gods, to demi-gods to make their points. I guess you can argue that these are human-like aliens since they share a form with humans, but the story of Hercules isn't about a man, it's about a half-man half-god.

I think my point was more that there are tons of instances where humans are not the the main reference point for the story telling. Granted, there are probably more examples of humans as the protagonist, but there certainly are plenty of exceptions to this.

Even though the OP was pretty quick to write off cartoony characters, the entire genre of childrens games is dominated with non-human protagonists...

However, most of the "childrens games" feature anthropomorphized animals (think about it... most animals in videogames have hands, opposing thumbs, cloth, expresive eyes and human-like mouths, many don't even have animal specific features). Of course, there are exceptions (Okami), but the OP didn't say all games had human protagonists, but most have.

And the greek mythology is not a good example of "non-humans" main characters. While greek gods are not humans, they certainly look like some. They even have very human defects and characteristics. In all accounts, all greek gods can be seen as idealized, inmortal humans.

I think we're on the same page here as to why humans are used as a starting point for character reference. It makes it more relatable to the viewer, reader or participant. You don't have to look very hard to find examples of both human and non-human protagonists. From hyper-realistic first person shooters to goofy off the wall platformers staring talking lizards, it's not very hard.

There are plenty of examples of non-human protagonists: from Ecco the Dolphin to any number of Jurassic Park games or something like Alien VS. Predator.

It's interesting to note that childrens games humanize animals to make them relatable, but the fact still stands that Crash Bandicoot is not a human. I think it would be more interesting to discuss how they make these characters human-like not only today but also in classic literature and perhaps that's a good starting point for another thread.

I still stand by the assertation that there tons of non-human protagonists in video games. I'll definitley agree that human protagonists out number the non-humans, but I wouldn't say there are very few non-human characters. I don't think it's fair to call human-like animal characters humans, (when they clearly are not human and are in fact animals). If they're covered in fur or scales, they're not human. They're an animal. They may have human features, but they're clearly not human and anybody looking at these characters will definitley recognize in a moment that they aren't human.

You're definitley entitled to disagree and call these animals human, but to me, if you can immediatley tell visually that the character isn't human, then it isn't human.