« Overwhelmed or Becalmed? | Home | End of the Month Updates »
Character Matters: Sith vs. Jedi
By Corvus | May 27, 2008
I’ve railed, here and elsewhere, against the idea that focusing more on characters will strengthen the role of storytelling in video game design. I believe that it isn’t compelling characters that make or break a story (in any medium), it’s compelling character relationships. I consider this to be a critical point because focusing on character doesn’t really impact gameplay in a meaningful fashion. Compelling gameplay, after all, could be described as the relationship between game mechanics. So using gameplay to try and reproduce compelling relationships seems a much stronger, and natural, choice when it comes to advancing video games as a storytelling medium.
These relationships need not be with other characters, either. It can be a relationship between the character and their environment, their past, their chemical dependency, their religion, or… the force.
I was poking at various Star Wars games during my recent illness (that is–my search for quality stories in the Star Wars story-verse) and I took a look at the use of force powers. Certain force powers, like heal and mind trick, are considered Jedi powers. Others, like grip and lightning bolt, are considered Sith powers. This distinction is purely cosmetic and character driven, as opposed to meaningful and relationship driven. The assumption that some force powers is good and others are bad seems to be based on the anecdotal evidence that only certain characters in the movies used those powers. It doesn’t take into account the actual application of the powers.
What if a Jedi used her ability to produce electrical energy to keep a hospital’s emergency generator running for a few hours? What if a Sith lord used heal to keep someone just alive enough to experience the terrible agony from a terminal illness? What if a Jedi used grip to open stubborn pickle jars for desperate picnickers, or a Sith lord used mind trick to convince a motorist to veer off a narrow mountain path to their death? The power itself shouldn’t be dark or light, evil or good, Sith or Jedi. No, that distinction ought to belong to the application of the power. In other words, how that power is used in relation to the environment and other characters.
All arguments for or against the Star Wars oeuvre, and all discussion of designer story vs. player story, aside– it’s this type of thinking that’s hindering the video game’s storytelling strengths–the exploration of relationships.
Tagged:relationships, storytelling, videogames. | 8 Comments »
May 27th, 2008 at 4:49 pm
I think the problem is not necessarily that the powers themselves have a distinct good/evil flavor. The problem is that the story implies that there is such thing as good and evil. The separation of powers is just a consequence of that fallacy.
I think this is also what makes the last 4 Lionhead games so miserable and I would agree with you – we really need to develop more complex approaches.
In games this is a special problem because games revolve around some kind of conflict. So separating between good and evil is very difficult to avoid.
That being said: I always thought the force powers were well-chosen for the kind of philosophy they want to convey. It is true that you could do good by using lightning but you could also do good by blasting planets and slaughtering young cute kittens (for example, if the kittes were carriers of a deadly desease). Not only the tools but also the actions themselves can always be re-framed as being good or evil.
So if “what” you do is also subjective, the “how” might be important after all. Controlling lightning carries the connotation of controlling an extremely violent and potentially destructive force of nature. In our mythologies, lightning is often associated with fury, pain and hate. Just think of characters like Zeus from the Greek Mythology.
Being able to convince people is the power of characters like Jesus or Socrates – people associated with wisdom, peace and benevolence. I don’t think the choice of power is just a cosmetic one.
May 27th, 2008 at 6:11 pm
While I agree that the “good vs. evil” choice in games is shallow and overused (I’ve posted about this before), I do think that simple allocation of good and bad powers is inherent to that mindset.
If, as you suggest, a game were to explore your relationship with the power and demonstrate why psychic electricity was evil and psychic brainwashing wasn’t, then it’d be another *ahem* story.
Your very example of Zeus proves that while lightning may be a potentially destructive force, it isn’t the exclusive domain of negativity. Zeus, after all, was the father of the entire pantheon. Thor, another lightning god, was powerful and prone to temper, but was widely considered the strongest and bravest of all the Aesir.
So, again, nuance. While good vs. evil is trite and aligning powers by those criteria shallow, the answer certainly is still go focus on relationships, even if it’s a Sith Lord’s relationship to the dark side of the force.
May 27th, 2008 at 8:34 pm
I think the problem is systemic of Lucas’ lazy writing. “Sith” and “Jedi” are barely ever defined in the mythos above “bad” and “good”. About the deepest we get in the movies is the whole “Rule Of Two” routine … which it doesn’t really take literary degree to note usually applies to the Jedi as well.
The distinction gets worse under scrutiny. The fight scene in Phantom Menace between Maul, Obi and Jinn shows Obi being emotional whereas Maul is dispassionate … and the Jedi have no troubles “fighting dirty” and teaming up against Maul.
The explanation is kinda neat though. Why we see Luke, Obi and even Jedi Anakin as reckless at times is because they aren’t used to accessing their emotions. Maul and Vader are cool as ice because they’re releasing their emotions constantly. Jedis are the goody goodies who can’t handle their beer, Sith are the fratboys who, while complete jerks, can hold their liquor.
And hence I think the powers follow suit. It’s not that Jedi couldn’t make lightning strikes – it’s that doing so requires using emotions they are used to bottling up. Jedis are better at completing your homework while the Sith are better at body shots kind of thing.
May 27th, 2008 at 9:15 pm
I’d argue two things, Josh. First, you’re completely reading your own rationalizations into Lucas’s lack of depth. Secondly, you’re exploring the Jedi and Sith’s relationships with their emotions and the force.
So. Awesome on both counts!
May 28th, 2008 at 6:35 am
Btw, the whole discussion reminds me of ThumbWars:
“You’ll never get away with this Black Helmet Man! You are bad! You are bad and we are good! Your badness will be the end of you, and our goodness will be our triumph! Bad is bad – good is good! Bad-bad-good-bad! Good-good-bad-good, bad! Good.”
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lJ06RKGcPBI
May 29th, 2008 at 8:05 pm
You make a very good point, Corvus. In a vacuum, nothing is good or evil, so it all comes down to perception.
When a game shows its characters as absolutes (using an arbitrary distinction such as good and evil which, again, doesn’t really exist but is just a matter of perception), it leaves no room for interpreting their relationship to the world., and no room for a player’s mind to step in and feel the story rather than rationalize it.
May 31st, 2008 at 2:36 am
The real question above everything is that are you with the Royalist Terrorists (The Jedi) or are you with freedom & deomcracy (The Sith). The rebels are a very small force, bloody terrorists go and ruin peace and harmony for the rest of us.
May 31st, 2008 at 10:44 am
Star Wars doesn’t show any democracy at all! It’s Feudalist Theocracy versus Communist Dictatorship and as far as I am concerned, all sides suck.