Full Games List
Featured Games
New Games
Reviews
Media
Images
Blogs
Game Updates
Images Feedback Summary
Game Design Highlights
Tutorials
Articles
Scripts
Utilities / Plugins
Resources
Engines
Engine Bulletins
What is Makerscore?
Past Events
Achievements
Misaos
Forums
Post History
Chat
New to RMN?
Full Store List
RMN Music Pack (free)
BACKGROUND STORIES FOR NPCS
Posts
tpasmall
228
tpasmall
View playlists
CloseSo as I've been slowly plugging along the main plot of my game, I've debated back and forth on how detailed I should get with the NPCs. I feel that the credibility of the story and their personalities will be affected by stories that the player may never even know about. It may be unimportant, but I feel like at the very least every NPC should at least be given a name. So I was just wondering what everyone else thinks about this. How detailed do you get with minor NPCs and do you feel that more detail can enhance the game or just be too much information to deal with (even if that information is never made available through gameplay).
I'm definitely for detailed (not over) NPCs, even if the player doesn't have the whole stories, it's a great way to avoid the warysome feeling of linearity and add a great deal of atmosphere and depth i. e. immersion capacity and fun to the game.
I agree with chana; if even minor characters have a purpose and a role, it really adds to the believability of the world you a trying to create.
One possible way to make their backstories more engaging for the player is to give certain characters little side quests; a little girl has lost her dog, a stranded man wants to send letters to his love, the black smith needs to raise money to keep his business running, etc. Little details like these might make players more invested in the main story.
One possible way to make their backstories more engaging for the player is to give certain characters little side quests; a little girl has lost her dog, a stranded man wants to send letters to his love, the black smith needs to raise money to keep his business running, etc. Little details like these might make players more invested in the main story.
A little bit of detail never hurt yeah. I've always liked the idea of people who often (coincidentially or not) end up in the same location as the hero's party. Salesmen, for instance ("Welcome to O'akas")
lol, yes. And the party is like, "Do you just follow us around?"
To which the salesman replies, "Sure do! Nobody else buys 50 healing potions in one go! You're putting my kids through college!"
To which the salesman replies, "Sure do! Nobody else buys 50 healing potions in one go! You're putting my kids through college!"
Airxzen
0
author=Yellow Magic
A little bit of detail never hurt yeah. I've always liked the idea of people who often (coincidentially or not) end up in the same location as the hero's party. Salesmen, for instance ("Welcome to O'akas")
But goddamit if O'aka wasnt where he was, I would of so Failed at ffX
ChuJooRi
1035
I always plan a lot of story behind any character in stories I write. Most of the time the reader or player only gets a fraction of the detail though. Then again I do that for pretty much any aspect of a story...
As a reader or player I like it when characters have a story behind them even if it's something little, but it's more interesting when you get those details little by little.
As a reader or player I like it when characters have a story behind them even if it's something little, but it's more interesting when you get those details little by little.
Shinan
4314
Naming every character to the player might actually sometimes be a bad idea. A character with a name tends to create associations that "this character might be someone important". Of course once you notice every character has a (maybe even a randomly generated) name you don't think about it. But then when someone says "could you find Martie McNumeroUno and bring him this package?" you basically have no idea who Mr McNumeroUno is because he didn't register as a named character when you met him (because everyone's a named character)
ON THE OTHER HAND.
It's generally a good idea to put a bit of background thought into characters (yeah it's not generally a good idea, it's ALWAYS a good idea). Just don't feel compelled to show all of it to the player. And for major players you could actually sometimes just go all out and create a character sheet all RPG-style. I don't really recommend this, but if world-building is what you love most then it might work out just fine. (just don't forget about plot and actual game in your world-building exercise)
ON THE OTHER HAND.
It's generally a good idea to put a bit of background thought into characters (yeah it's not generally a good idea, it's ALWAYS a good idea). Just don't feel compelled to show all of it to the player. And for major players you could actually sometimes just go all out and create a character sheet all RPG-style. I don't really recommend this, but if world-building is what you love most then it might work out just fine. (just don't forget about plot and actual game in your world-building exercise)
In "Antiarctica" I, well, made a sprite and faceset for each and every single NPC. I did not use (overused) standard shit. And I'm still doing it this way. The reviewers liked it a lot saying those people "keep in mind" and make it more fun to talk to them instead of talking to one more Alex or blonde haired hero from Rudra's Hidden Treasure.
To give everybody a name could be interesting IF the names are funny. But stuff like "Michael Harrison" would be waste of time.
Background stories would work if you'd make a side quest for each. If you don't then they are indeed too much for the player and I as a player wouldn't care nor read the dialogue.
To give everybody a name could be interesting IF the names are funny. But stuff like "Michael Harrison" would be waste of time.
Background stories would work if you'd make a side quest for each. If you don't then they are indeed too much for the player and I as a player wouldn't care nor read the dialogue.
Crystalgate
694
The fewer NPCs you have, the more effort you can realistically put into each of them. I also prefer a quality over quantity approach, it's better with a few well thought trough NPCs than hundreds of NPCs with backstories like "I was born a farmer, but became a fisherman and my dad also died when I was ten".
Personally, I don't think a backstory adds that much, rather you should think trough what they should say.
Personally, I don't think a backstory adds that much, rather you should think trough what they should say.
tpasmall
228
Part of my reason for wanting to give every character a name and backstory is to try to help the player to emotionally connect to whats happening in the game. While not every NPCs story would be given, I think if I make up a little blurb about who they are for my own use, it would help make their reactions to things that happen more believable. And if the player feels like they can connect to the NPCs, when things happen to the NPCs (say they are massacred), each unique personality would be missed. But as people have said, the main focus is to avoid redundancy and develop their dialogue.
Hoddmimir
200
My personal opinion is that I should be able to tell something about every single character in the game very quickly. With NPCs it can be as little as this guy is a baker or this guy is waiting in line to buy groceries. But the fewer characters the more I want to know about them and the more important the character the more I want to know about them. The thing that drives me up a wall is an NPC that says to me "They say there is a magical treasure in the woods!" because who the hell is he? Why does he know this? Why is he telling me? Instead an NPC who says, "When I was walking in the woods earlier today, I saw something shiny up a tree. Isn't that strange?" Now I know he was walking in the woods, noticed something odd, and just wants to share because he thinks it's weird. That is really enough for me for an NPC like that. Important characters should build up a much more rich story of time. I don't want a bio, but plenty of growth and background. That's my 2 cents.
There's also the fact that in the hero's home town the NPCs should probably be more detailed than other NPCs seeing as the hero knows them much better than the ones he meets on his travels. Of course you get the stalkers who follow you around or you meet a few times - they should also be pretty detailed. Other NPCs should have mini-stories and relationships.
So many people forget this! NPCs have relationships with the other people in their town and should sometimes act on them! It's not just 'me and the wife/kids'. There's also 'that annoying old biddy next door', 'that rip-off merchant who sells fakes' and 'the pretty flower seller who my wife hates but is really nice to the kids'.
Also, depending on the type of game you're making you might go for a minimalist approach. It doesn't make sense for a game where you're saving dots from ghosts to have detailed history of each and every dot.
But if you are making an RPG at least think about adding some sort of detail to the NPCs. You don't have to give them names but they should all have something that makes them a bit different from everyone else. Maybe just let the player think of them as 'the girl who flirts with the knights whilst they're on duty but is really a spy' or 'the annoying kid who follows you around the fair and asks for change'. Or give each NPC it's own face or sprite.
(Though this can back fire when you have multiple days spent at a town and they go do different things each day that you're there and the reviewer seems to think that they're all different characters using the same sprites in the same town... -_-; )
What if we tried something like this instead?
"When my sister and I were picking mushrooms in the forest she says she saw something strange in a tree. I'm not going to fall for the same prank twice, though. She got me real good last time!"
It's still one box of text, but there's a bit more information. What do we know now?
He has a sister that likes to pull pranks. He seems to fall for them a lot/is gullible. There may or may not be a treasure in a tree the woods. There are mushrooms in the woods.
It really doesn't take much to create a character like this and just makes the game feel a little more lively.
So many people forget this! NPCs have relationships with the other people in their town and should sometimes act on them! It's not just 'me and the wife/kids'. There's also 'that annoying old biddy next door', 'that rip-off merchant who sells fakes' and 'the pretty flower seller who my wife hates but is really nice to the kids'.
Also, depending on the type of game you're making you might go for a minimalist approach. It doesn't make sense for a game where you're saving dots from ghosts to have detailed history of each and every dot.
But if you are making an RPG at least think about adding some sort of detail to the NPCs. You don't have to give them names but they should all have something that makes them a bit different from everyone else. Maybe just let the player think of them as 'the girl who flirts with the knights whilst they're on duty but is really a spy' or 'the annoying kid who follows you around the fair and asks for change'. Or give each NPC it's own face or sprite.
(Though this can back fire when you have multiple days spent at a town and they go do different things each day that you're there and the reviewer seems to think that they're all different characters using the same sprites in the same town... -_-; )
author=HoddmimirFrom this we can gather that he likes to take walks in the woods and there may be a treasure there.
"When I was walking in the woods earlier today, I saw something shiny up a tree. Isn't that strange?"
What if we tried something like this instead?
"When my sister and I were picking mushrooms in the forest she says she saw something strange in a tree. I'm not going to fall for the same prank twice, though. She got me real good last time!"
It's still one box of text, but there's a bit more information. What do we know now?
He has a sister that likes to pull pranks. He seems to fall for them a lot/is gullible. There may or may not be a treasure in a tree the woods. There are mushrooms in the woods.
It really doesn't take much to create a character like this and just makes the game feel a little more lively.
yamata no orochi
184
I'm not sure how much I can add in terms of how detailed NPCs should be, but I thought it would be worth positing a game that does NPCs WELL:
Dragon Quest IX's plot is pretty simple. It's more of a series of vignettes focused around the towns you encounter rather than an overarching plot like Final Fantasy VI's or Chrono Trigger's. It compensates for that by making each town distinctive and filling them with quirky, interesting people. Each character in every town has something worthwhile to say, and while it might not be important in the grand scheme of things it always adds at least a little bit to how you understand the world. Every time an event happens in the town, people often have different things to say. It's not as detailed a simulation as, say, an Elder Scrolls game, but the NPCs compensate by having a lot more personality.
Here's the crazy part--even after you leave the town, wandering all over the world, the NPCs are still up to something. So you might go back to a town you haven't visited in a while to find out that a marriage is going on, or a festival, or that one of the old folk in the town has died. It's all probably scripted, since Dragon Quest IX is pretty linear. But the fact that these NPCs are constantly changing, even when you aren't looking at them, contributes a lot to the illusion of grandness--that the world you are traveling in doesn't depend on the player, but has a life of its own instead.
It's a tall order, and I'm not saying that everyone has to aim for this level (especially at something like the Trails in the Sky games, in which every single person in every city has something to say that changes after every plot event occurs) I think it is true, though, that well-done NPCs can not only add immeasurably to an RPG's setting, but also elevate a pretty good RPG into a great one, especially if that game doesn't have much "plot" to begin with. The writing doesn't have to be voluminous or brilliant, but aiming for at least a level of cleverness and consistency helps a lot, I think!
Dragon Quest IX's plot is pretty simple. It's more of a series of vignettes focused around the towns you encounter rather than an overarching plot like Final Fantasy VI's or Chrono Trigger's. It compensates for that by making each town distinctive and filling them with quirky, interesting people. Each character in every town has something worthwhile to say, and while it might not be important in the grand scheme of things it always adds at least a little bit to how you understand the world. Every time an event happens in the town, people often have different things to say. It's not as detailed a simulation as, say, an Elder Scrolls game, but the NPCs compensate by having a lot more personality.
Here's the crazy part--even after you leave the town, wandering all over the world, the NPCs are still up to something. So you might go back to a town you haven't visited in a while to find out that a marriage is going on, or a festival, or that one of the old folk in the town has died. It's all probably scripted, since Dragon Quest IX is pretty linear. But the fact that these NPCs are constantly changing, even when you aren't looking at them, contributes a lot to the illusion of grandness--that the world you are traveling in doesn't depend on the player, but has a life of its own instead.
It's a tall order, and I'm not saying that everyone has to aim for this level (especially at something like the Trails in the Sky games, in which every single person in every city has something to say that changes after every plot event occurs) I think it is true, though, that well-done NPCs can not only add immeasurably to an RPG's setting, but also elevate a pretty good RPG into a great one, especially if that game doesn't have much "plot" to begin with. The writing doesn't have to be voluminous or brilliant, but aiming for at least a level of cleverness and consistency helps a lot, I think!
author=Liberty
'the pretty flower seller who my wife hates but is really nice to the kids'... 'the girl who flirts with the knights whilst they're on duty but is really a spy' or 'the annoying kid who follows you around the fair and asks for change'...
"When my sister and I were picking mushrooms in the forest she says she saw something strange in a tree. I'm not going to fall for the same prank twice, though. She got me real good last time
Great NPCs, I love those. This said, you're really going to have to keep track, especially the maker, worth it though if you can do it and not get lost (maybe not too many?).
LockeZ
I'd really like to get rid of LockeZ. His play style is way too unpredictable. He's always like this too. If he ran a country, he'd just kill and imprison people at random until crime stopped.
5958
Here's one possible problem with making NPCs more interesting. Every time an trivial NPC gets character development, you could have used that dialogue for adding character development to the main characters instead.
As an example, here are two versions of a scene in which you find a secluded house in the wilderness. This is in a game set entirely within a hellish prison dimension.
Version 1: NPC character development.
Claire: Don't get many visitors here. My name's Claire. You must not have been out here long yet, if you're still wandering around.
Claire: Those who are sent through the Black Gate always dream of escape at first. Because the prison is vast and unrestricted, it seems there must be a way out. But death is all that lies in its outskirts.
Claire: Everyone has tried. Everyone you meet here is someone who's given up. The ones who didn't give up are dead. Take some advice from someone who has watched all of her comrades die... Don't fight against this place. It wins every time. Just make yourself a safe place to live and never leave it.
Claire: ...Though, in honesty, I didn't actually build this house. I simply killed the man who lived here before me.
Claire: Were you looking for supplies?
Version 2: Main character development.
Claire: Don't get many visitors here. My name's Claire. You must not have been out here long yet, if you're still wandering around.
Party Member 1: No, we were just recently... sent here.
Party Member 2: It looks like you've been here a while, though. Got a house and everything.
Party Member 1: Ever seen anyone manage to escape? From what I've seen, the prison is vast and unrestricted. There must be a way out. Are the monsters the only thing stopping people from escaping? Because I'm pretty damn sure I can handle the monsters.
Claire: Everyone has tried. Everyone you meet here is someone who's given up. The ones who didn't give up are dead.
Party Member 2: You don't know that. All you know for sure is that you never saw them again.
Claire: You can't imagine what I've seen with my own eyes. Take my advice: don't fight against this place. It wins every time. Just make yourself a safe place to live and never leave it.
Party Member 1: And, what, build myself a nice house on the beach and settle into retirement? Bullshit.
Claire: Better than being dead.
Party Member 2: Giving up is no different than dying.
Party Member 1: If I really wanted a house, I'd just kill someone who lived in one.
Claire: ...
Party Member 1: But today, I'm just looking for supplies.
The biggest noticable difference, here, is dialogue vs. monologue. But more importantly, some lines that are said by the NPC in version 1 are said by the party members in version 2. If you have enough variety in your party members, then for almost any quirky or characterization-building line you're thinking of giving to an NPC, you probably have a main character whose personality matches that line. So instead of making the NPCs feel alive, I would generally prefer the main characters to feel more alive, having dialogue almost every time you talk to someone instead of just a couple sentences per chapter. Too many games have too much trouble just making the main characters come to life to be worrying about random townspeople.
FYI, though, the first version of this scene is the one actually used in the game that I wrote this for. The game only has one playable character, who is a silent protagonist. So NPC characterization is the only kind of characterization you ever actually get.
As an example, here are two versions of a scene in which you find a secluded house in the wilderness. This is in a game set entirely within a hellish prison dimension.
Version 1: NPC character development.
Claire: Don't get many visitors here. My name's Claire. You must not have been out here long yet, if you're still wandering around.
Claire: Those who are sent through the Black Gate always dream of escape at first. Because the prison is vast and unrestricted, it seems there must be a way out. But death is all that lies in its outskirts.
Claire: Everyone has tried. Everyone you meet here is someone who's given up. The ones who didn't give up are dead. Take some advice from someone who has watched all of her comrades die... Don't fight against this place. It wins every time. Just make yourself a safe place to live and never leave it.
Claire: ...Though, in honesty, I didn't actually build this house. I simply killed the man who lived here before me.
Claire: Were you looking for supplies?
Version 2: Main character development.
Claire: Don't get many visitors here. My name's Claire. You must not have been out here long yet, if you're still wandering around.
Party Member 1: No, we were just recently... sent here.
Party Member 2: It looks like you've been here a while, though. Got a house and everything.
Party Member 1: Ever seen anyone manage to escape? From what I've seen, the prison is vast and unrestricted. There must be a way out. Are the monsters the only thing stopping people from escaping? Because I'm pretty damn sure I can handle the monsters.
Claire: Everyone has tried. Everyone you meet here is someone who's given up. The ones who didn't give up are dead.
Party Member 2: You don't know that. All you know for sure is that you never saw them again.
Claire: You can't imagine what I've seen with my own eyes. Take my advice: don't fight against this place. It wins every time. Just make yourself a safe place to live and never leave it.
Party Member 1: And, what, build myself a nice house on the beach and settle into retirement? Bullshit.
Claire: Better than being dead.
Party Member 2: Giving up is no different than dying.
Party Member 1: If I really wanted a house, I'd just kill someone who lived in one.
Claire: ...
Party Member 1: But today, I'm just looking for supplies.
The biggest noticable difference, here, is dialogue vs. monologue. But more importantly, some lines that are said by the NPC in version 1 are said by the party members in version 2. If you have enough variety in your party members, then for almost any quirky or characterization-building line you're thinking of giving to an NPC, you probably have a main character whose personality matches that line. So instead of making the NPCs feel alive, I would generally prefer the main characters to feel more alive, having dialogue almost every time you talk to someone instead of just a couple sentences per chapter. Too many games have too much trouble just making the main characters come to life to be worrying about random townspeople.
FYI, though, the first version of this scene is the one actually used in the game that I wrote this for. The game only has one playable character, who is a silent protagonist. So NPC characterization is the only kind of characterization you ever actually get.
Shinan
4314
The second one has the problem of length though. The first one works alright for the first time you talk to the NPC, the second one is just painfully long even when you just randomly talk to a person. If something like that happens too often people (with people I mean me) would dread talking to any npc for the fear of ending up in a longwinded character piece cutscene.
(basically it's my "five textbox rule" :)
(basically it's my "five textbox rule" :)
LockeZ
I'd really like to get rid of LockeZ. His play style is way too unpredictable. He's always like this too. If he ran a country, he'd just kill and imprison people at random until crime stopped.
5958
Well, it's true that dialogue takes up more textboxes than monologue, but it's also more interesting. However, complaining about too much dialogue is an odd complaint in a topic about how to add deeper characterization to minor characters. If you want a character to leave any sort of impact on the player, you're going to need a lot more than those five textboxes. Are you against significant characterization for NPCs, then, I assume?
Hoddmimir
200
The other point I would make is that the first scenario can be broken into several times talking to the NPC where is a dialogue really needs to be done all at once, or possibly in a few big chunks. I agree that scenario 2 is probably better for development because main characters are more important than secondary ones. It just adds an extra requirement to character interaction which as you yourself pointed out doesn't work in all games. I also think that your example doesn't just make the main characters more interesting. It still serves to make the NPC more interesting as well.
Verincia
366
Let's talk about something else. Although trying to make the NPCs interesting for the players there's also time issues with the maker. What if the maker doesn't want to put that much effort into making NPCs the interesting? There are a lot of people out there who don't really know how to make a more interesting set of NPCs. They really have no idea how to make their world a little more riveting for the player. And also, who wants to put that much work into little dots on a map, that are there because it's a city, and cities, town, villages, etc. have people in them? Putting more work into the NPCs means time away from other aspects of the game, especially you're one of those people who just wants to get this game done.
