For this CS task, Sharon asked us to contrast and compare 2 characters, she also told us to choose very different characters, so I decided to go with the Dragonborn (Dovahkiin) from Skyrim and 47 from the Hitman series.
We have a set of rules we need to follow, similar to BA1, we have to use our Contextual Framework, Structural Framework, and Visual Framework, as well as add our research to this blog post to show evidence of our analysis.
Contextual Framework:
- Origins: is there a literary/visual/arts connection?
- Cultural Influences
- Company (Do they have a ‘House Style’?)
- Target Audience
- Origins: is there a literary/visual/arts connection?
- Cultural Influences
- Company (Do they have a ‘House Style’?)
- Target Audience
Structural Framework:
- How does the character function within the rules and conditions of the game? How has their function affected their design?
- What point of view does the player occupy in relation to the character?
- What interactive experiences does the character provide for players in the game?
- Does the character’s design express ‘true character’(in McKee’s definition)?
- How does the character function within the rules and conditions of the game? How has their function affected their design?
- What point of view does the player occupy in relation to the character?
- What interactive experiences does the character provide for players in the game?
- Does the character’s design express ‘true character’(in McKee’s definition)?
Visual Framework:
- What does the character look like?
- What are the possible visual influences?
- Does the character reveal intertextual references? If so, what purpose do they serve?
As far as rules within the game go there are very few, besides physical limitations such as flying and walking through walls (even that's achievable on the PC version), the game restricts you in a very small way, either that or they do a fantastic job of leading you in circles so you never really see the edges of the game. The second is something I like to believe happens other open world games such as Grand Theft Auto.
Third person or firstperson, the game lets you choose for different scenarios/personal preference. I think that firstperson is more rewarding whilst exploring and discovering new things as it scales you down and makes everything feel bigger. Third Person is more useful for combat or if you're looking for something in particular.
The player has huge reign over the characters weaponry, armour and skills. This allows you to create a complete unique character. I think this is the reason as to why so many people adore the game, it's personal.
The character looks very medieval during the beginning stages. Iron armour, wood and leather. This takes it's inspirations from it's surroundings. When you start in the game the towns are made from stone and wood, it's all very basic, as it would've been. Therefore the armour is basic too. It's only when you go seeking out other materials that you can make new forms of armour.
- What does the character look like?
- What are the possible visual influences?
- Does the character reveal intertextual references? If so, what purpose do they serve?
Dragonborn - Dovahkiin (The Elder Scrolls: Skyrim)
This is the playable character from the most recent RPG single player installment in the ESO franchise. This game, as well as the previous games, takes a heavy influence from medieval times, set in a fantasy world where dragons and magic exists. There are countless medieval resources such as old weapons, pieces of armour, tapestries etc to go off for this game. I think that's part of the appeal, it's like Grand Theft Auto but takes part hundreds of years ago where you make your own armour and smith your own weapons.
It could be argued that it's also set upon quit a fairytale base, the protagonist pursues on quests set to him by the lords of the land to reclaim certain items or to slay some creature. It's got a folklore feel to it.
The game was created by Bethesda, and I believe they have quite a strong house style that spreads across their games. In particular the most recent fallout games as well as the most recent ESO games have many similarities. To list a few; User interface and inventory, weapon stats, carry weight, physics, combat, map and marker placements as well as mission structure.
I think this is usually done to hit a very wide audience, partially to keep it generic for those more casual gamers, however as there is usually so much freedom within what you do, it keeps the die hard fans entertained with complex lore.
Third person or firstperson, the game lets you choose for different scenarios/personal preference. I think that firstperson is more rewarding whilst exploring and discovering new things as it scales you down and makes everything feel bigger. Third Person is more useful for combat or if you're looking for something in particular.
The player has huge reign over the characters weaponry, armour and skills. This allows you to create a complete unique character. I think this is the reason as to why so many people adore the game, it's personal.
The character looks very medieval during the beginning stages. Iron armour, wood and leather. This takes it's inspirations from it's surroundings. When you start in the game the towns are made from stone and wood, it's all very basic, as it would've been. Therefore the armour is basic too. It's only when you go seeking out other materials that you can make new forms of armour.
47 (Hitman series)
47 is an entirely fiction character, but with heavy western cultural influences. His clothing, weapons and the cars in game all seem very modern. The settings in which the missions take place are often actual places or based upon real places. Either that or the buildings are created very closely to real world counterparts.
The thing I always loved about these games is how down to earth they are, admittedly a super-assassin isn't what I mean, but the technique of the kills and the settings often leave you wondering, 'could this have happened'. I find that because you have the possibility of completing a mission flawlessly that it is something that could be done outside the game.
Within Hitman the rules and conditions are very strict, there are certain things you can and can't do, but what does vary is the way in which you do those. It's heavily story based so you're steered through levels entirely, it's the opposite of a sandbox like game.
The game viewpoint is third person throughout the game, this allows a wide view of your surroundings as well as being aware.
The character's career is moulded by the choices you make throughout missions. This gives it a personal feel, any actions you take you have to face the consequences.
The character 47 has a very clean look. The way you'd imagine a modern assassin would look. As good as he looks I've always found his attire confusing, I know it's become more of a status symbol but someone in his position would want to blend in as much as possible, not be wearing a tailored black suit with a red tie, it'd make you stick out.
I feel I've chosen two characters that are quite conflicted, opposite ends of the scales. Playing as the dragonkin you're dropped in an open map where exploration is the key. You develop your character entirely from scratch starting with next to nothing. You can play through the whole game discovering a lot of it and creating the best weapons and armour within the game without actually getting far in the storyline at all, developing your character and the storyline are almost two entirely separate things.
Hitman however is the other end of the scale, you're put into the game with a pair of pistols that you can use to complete the game. Each time you spawn you're in a new level which you play through, usually, without going back. The storyline is everything within Hitman.
In conclusion two totally different games but equally as satisfying due to the freedom of choice.
No comments:
Post a Comment