05-09-2015, 10:25 PM
As with many other kinds of aspects, it depends on the game. Story is a big factor. Sometimes a game only works if the character is pre-determined, for example in the Professor Layton games the story is so focused and significant that it hinges upon the main character.
A fixed character also allows you to experience the game as an observer, rather than the character yourself. You're controlling them, but you aren't them. This can subtly affect the experience of the game. If you think about the possibility of custom characters in something like Luigi's Mansion or a LoZ, I mean it would work and the story could still go in a similar way, but it wouldn't be the same. It has to be Luigi that gets scared but saves the day anyway, it has to be Link who goes through dungeons and slays the bosses. To be perfectly honest, I actually dislike the fact that you can change Link's name in most of the games, and feel that the name you choose should only be used for save files, not the character himself.
In other games the gameplay is based off the character's uniqueness, and as such custom characters don't work. Blocks That Matter features Tetrobot, and he does stuff that only he can do. Similarly, sometimes the character's stance in the game just doesn't justify customisation. In Portal there'd be no point in customising Chell, even though you could and the story, gameplay, and everything else would work pretty much exactly the same.
One thing I do enjoy in these kinds of games are alternate characters, if it works. That is, unlockable characters that just give aesthetic differences (or in some cases, slightly influence gameplay). Games like Bit.Trip Runner 2, Super Meat Boy, BattleBlock Theater, The Binding of Isaac. In these cases the character doesn't have a heavy impact on the game, but still doesn't justify full customisation. The aesthetic items in TF2 are also nice, they don't change your character but still make them unique.
Personally, I've only seen full character customisation happen in first or third-person RPGs, and only where the story is flexible enough to support it. Elder Scrolls, Fallout, that sort of thing. I don't play these often but the diversity of the world allows you to make your own character and create a journey unique to them. This also increases replayability.
And of course there is the array of MMOs like Runescape and WoW. Here it's obviously necessary, due to the potential of there being virtually infinite players.
Basically, as a summary, it just depends. It's not something I specifically look for in a game, and usually it's just used where it fits. There are some cases where I feel it could have improved a game though (e.g. Torchlight).
A fixed character also allows you to experience the game as an observer, rather than the character yourself. You're controlling them, but you aren't them. This can subtly affect the experience of the game. If you think about the possibility of custom characters in something like Luigi's Mansion or a LoZ, I mean it would work and the story could still go in a similar way, but it wouldn't be the same. It has to be Luigi that gets scared but saves the day anyway, it has to be Link who goes through dungeons and slays the bosses. To be perfectly honest, I actually dislike the fact that you can change Link's name in most of the games, and feel that the name you choose should only be used for save files, not the character himself.
In other games the gameplay is based off the character's uniqueness, and as such custom characters don't work. Blocks That Matter features Tetrobot, and he does stuff that only he can do. Similarly, sometimes the character's stance in the game just doesn't justify customisation. In Portal there'd be no point in customising Chell, even though you could and the story, gameplay, and everything else would work pretty much exactly the same.
One thing I do enjoy in these kinds of games are alternate characters, if it works. That is, unlockable characters that just give aesthetic differences (or in some cases, slightly influence gameplay). Games like Bit.Trip Runner 2, Super Meat Boy, BattleBlock Theater, The Binding of Isaac. In these cases the character doesn't have a heavy impact on the game, but still doesn't justify full customisation. The aesthetic items in TF2 are also nice, they don't change your character but still make them unique.
Personally, I've only seen full character customisation happen in first or third-person RPGs, and only where the story is flexible enough to support it. Elder Scrolls, Fallout, that sort of thing. I don't play these often but the diversity of the world allows you to make your own character and create a journey unique to them. This also increases replayability.
And of course there is the array of MMOs like Runescape and WoW. Here it's obviously necessary, due to the potential of there being virtually infinite players.
Basically, as a summary, it just depends. It's not something I specifically look for in a game, and usually it's just used where it fits. There are some cases where I feel it could have improved a game though (e.g. Torchlight).