Games need to stop with the chosen-one heroes

Default_picture
Thursday, November 15, 2012
EDITOR'S NOTEfrom Eduardo Moutinho

For me, being the "chosen one" doesn't matter as much as being vulnerable. Plenty of recent releases have given us extremely powerful yet extremely flawed heroes to battle with. The key is nailing the delicate balance between generic and genuine.

Halo 4

This article contains spoilers for Diablo III, Halo 4, and The Walking Dead: Episode 4 -- Around Every Corner.


This year, we’ve seen a surprising increase in the number of “chosen one” storylines in games. Kingdoms of Amalur: Reckoning, Diablo III, and The Secret World (among others) all have you playing as characters who are somehow more important than everyone else in their respective worlds.

To tell you the truth, I’m kinda getting tired of it.

How cliché is the chosen-one concept by now? It’s been used in countless forms of media, especially since The Matrix became such a popular film. It just feels lazy to keep using it at this point. An idea as pervasive as this has trouble making an impact since it is so common. I often roll my eyes whenever the concept pops up in a narrative.

 

Diablo III’s story, as an example, eventually reveals your character to be a nephalem, the (nearly) extinct offspring of angels and demons. This is supposed to explain how you are so good at fighting the lords of hell. Was this really necessary? They never did anything like this in the first two Diablo releases. As far as I remember, you were some warrior just trying to fight evil. No special powers, just training and luck.

I just played through Halo 4 and was supremely surprised (read: pissed off) at the insertion of a “chosen one” story angle. The series has never featured anything like this before. It just feels like it was shoved in to make the narrative work. Master Chief doesn’t need the distinction to be a good character. He is already one of the greatest soldiers the Halo universe has ever seen. He also has some of the most unbelievable luck (something the fiction actually highlights). Why did he need to be made into some kind of messianic figure, too?

These plot devices dampen the actions of main characters. Every time they do something amazing, the impact of that action is lessened by the fact that they are fated to save the world. The games are already telling you what’s going to happen. Why should you be impressed?

I think most gamers don’t really have a problem playing as a normal man or woman being forced into dangerous situations. Take the immense popularity of Nathan Drake from the Uncharted series for example. He’s a normal guy who doesn’t have any special powers, aside from being amazingly lucky. He isn’t some divine savior of humanity. He just wants to learn about history.

The Walking Dead

Another good example is Lee Everett from Telltale Games’ The Walking Dead. He’s just some guy trying to survive in the zombie apocalypse and protect young Clementine as best he can. In the most recent episode of the series, a zombie has bitten him, which means he will soon become one himself. I’m not angry that he isn’t blessed with some unprecedented immunity to the zombie bite. I’m heartbroken that he is going to die.

Characters like these are still interesting because we can relate to them. Fate has not given them special destinies. They are everyday human beings, just like us. We empathize with them when they’re thrown into difficult situations and try to help them out of danger because that’s what we would do in their shoes. 

In the end, I feel that these characters will always be more interesting. Where’s the fun in a character we know is destined to save the day?

 
Problem? Report this post
BITMOB'S SPONSOR
Adsense-placeholder
Comments (8)
Default_picture
November 15, 2012

Thanks for the front page promotion.  Not sure I agree with a few of the changes, but most of them were probably deserved.

Default_picture
November 15, 2012

This is a good read, though don't certain games (though it happens out of games as well) try to make the hero have flaws despite being the "chosen one". 

Default_picture
November 15, 2012

I'm not saying that all "chosen one" characters have no flaws.  I just think that the idea of a character that is fated to do something is much less interesting than one who does it even when it isn't expected of them.

Default_picture
November 16, 2012

We've known that Master Chief is a reclaimer since Halo 1. 343 Industries was just much more up-front about it in Halo 4.

Default_picture
November 16, 2012

I know he was a Reclaimer in the first game, but that wasn't really anything special in there.  All that meant was that he could take the Index through the Library to fire off the Halo ring.  It didn't say anything about him being fated to do anything.

In Halo 4, they are suggesting something more meaningful will come of this.  Maybe it won't and I'll be annoyed for nothing.  We'll just have to wait and see.

Default_picture
November 18, 2012

I am surprised that you did not mention shepard. He was not destined to save the universe, but was forced into the role through his skill and the situation he ultimately was forced into.  

Default_picture
November 18, 2012

Shepard didn't really feel like it like a "chosen one" story to me.  She was just a very good soldier who was able to hire a bunch of the best men and women in the galaxy to fight the Reapers.  There isn't anything/anyone that said she was destined to do this.

The very end of the 3rd game almost veers into "chosen one" territory with the weird choice you can make.  I don't think this counts either because it seems like that could have happened to anyone who made it that far.

Default_picture
November 25, 2012

I'm fairly certain that Master Chief isn't meant to be "The Chosen One". I could be wrong, obviously, but I hope I'm not.

In the exposition scene with the Librarian, when she repeatedly makes reference to 'you', and 'your [something]' being the culimnation of a thousand lifetimes of work, I believe this is meant to mean Spartan's and humanity in general -- not John-117 in particular. He just happens to be the guy that is there, or is fated to be the guy that is there because of his "luck", if you want to read it that way.

I admit that the scene is confusing, and poorly worded. I also admit that the "gene-song" idea is confusing, and is really just bio-magic. There are some good and great elements to the Halo story, and some that are silly.

In the expanded universe there's a special group of Forerunners that are basically a chaste of bioengineers. The Librarian is their boss. They're alleged to have some way of recording data, even whole personalities, in gene form and selectively activating and moving that data around between organisms and robots (ancillas).

I think the idea they (the writers) are attempting to express, and have most likely failed at (if people are taking it as a messiah prophecy), is that the Librarian manipulated our genes in the deep past in order to guide our evolution to a form that can defeat both the Flood and the Forerunners, and so that we can become the custodians of the Mantle -- the responsibility of caring for all life in the galaxy.

What's really dubious is that the overall story seems to assume that humanity ought to want, and ought to have that responsibility.

You must log in to post a comment. Please register if you do not have an account yet.