In the game of the year voting, I voted for Baldur's Gate 3 everywhere I could. But not for the plot. Yes, there were well-written characters and many interesting situations. However, the main character was too perfect. He did everything well, and all men and women aspired to him.
Over time I wondered if there were other options? I'm currently playing Morrowind. His lore mentions a certain hero who can unite houses that have been warring for centuries. Guess whether this hero is a Nerevarine or not.
Before that I played “Black Book”. A young girl discovers all seven sorrows that no one has ever discovered. Heroes 4 at 14 years old was considered the owner of the best plot for revealing evil factions. I recently replayed this game. Yes, the evil factions have their own ideology. But the heroes manage everything just the same.
First, let's figure out who a Mary Sue is. A Mary Sue is a character archetype that an author assigns exaggerated, unrealistic virtues, abilities, appearance, and luck (according to Wikipedia). These characters are often found in fan fiction written by young authors. People love characters who make their readers' dreams come true. Trying to make the hero interesting, authors sometimes forget about his negative qualities.
What's so bad about Mary Sue?? Firstly, they are unrealistic. You don’t believe in a hero who easily solves all problems, nor in the world around you, where everything is created for one character. Secondly, the conflict is not felt, because the character solves it without problems. There is no character development. Thirdly, they don’t need help, because they can do everything themselves. Of course, everyone wants to be friends with a Mary Sue, but is such a relationship a real friendship??
I often see characters like this in games. For example, the main character from Doom (2016) is far superior to any human or demon. In the first minutes of the game, he breaks the chains with his bare hands and kills the imp. He meets an antagonist who is afraid of him. And Samuel Hayden, who offered help, was immediately refused.
From
the first minutes the antagonist says that we need to be restrained.
Panic grows over time
Okay, let's say Doom doesn't focus on story. Let's look at other games where story plays an important role. In The Witcher 3, Geralt has a literary source where the Witcher is not a Mary Sue. He was almost killed by the Welfogorean, and in the end he actually lost to the King of Nilfgaard. He only survived because Emhyr decided that incest was not the best thing to do. What's in the game?
In the game he defeats any enemy, despite their numerical advantage. He solves any problem, although in only two ways: by sniffing out the truth or by killing the villains. Sometimes, however, you can solve everything with words. But even here his mercifulness creeps out – the witcher turns out to be an excellent actor, detective, and his ability to persuade ensures unquestioning obedience.
According to the book, witchers are cursed, and in the game, too, nameless NPCs use a rude phrase. But it’s simply impossible to count how many characters love and respect him. Kings, sorceresses, the chief of intelligence, dwarves, elves – everyone wants to be friends with him. Even when the most powerful people in the world try to behave decently, Geralt shows that he is above this and grossly violates etiquette.
Convincing witchers won't work in reality
Well, if there is one hero in the game, then he must solve all the gameplay problems. Let's look at party games. For example, Dragon Age Origins. In this game you play as a noble, dwarf, mage or elf who loses and goes to the Gray Wardens. This is interesting!
After this loss, time seems to freeze. Neither the pestilence nor Loghain do anything while we gather an army and decide the fate of all the mages of Ferelden, the Dalish tribe, the kingdom of the dwarves and, finally, all of Ferelden. Along the way, we also emerge victorious from the conflict described in the prologue.
It turns out that even if Morrigan is able to kill everyone alone in the gameplay, in the plot the gray guard becomes a lifesaver.
The game Pestilence (2018) is unique in many ways. The author called her “torturous,” and the councils say that it is impossible to save everyone. It's true, Artemy can save everyone 100% only with the help of powder, which is scarce and still needs to be found. In addition, the protagonist is constantly experiencing a lack of food. When you get used to difficulties, new ones appear. Everything, of course, is decided by banal knowledge of tricks. After looking at the guide (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8f23PtIMyxc), any player will be able, just like in all games, to save the good and kill the bad. But this is after watching the guides or on the second/third playthrough, so I consider Pestilence a game without Mary Sue.
In my short gaming experience, I have come across another game without Mary Sue – Disco Elysium. I was there for only two days, but already there I noticed that although Desbois is an excellent police officer with incredible productivity, he can’t do everything. The player is constantly asked to test the hero's abilities. The player may boot after another failure or simply skip the check. These players want to play as a Mary Sue? Dybovsky noted in an interview that it is impossible to create a game that fully complies with the logic of a dream, since the player may lose control. I found an interesting comment on Stopgame in which a player complained that when he wanted to become an evil character, he was exposed by one of the bosses of Absolute. Maxim Milyazev in his review also expressed dissatisfaction with the fact that BG3 requires safe scams from players. Perhaps the players themselves want to play as Merry Sue?
Screenwriting is a complex and multifaceted field with no clear answers. I can't say that Mary Sue definitely ruins the entire game or movie. All of the games listed are popular and loved, and their characters are loved and respected. However, would these games be better if they had flaws or if sometimes the heroes were defeated?? This is a question to which I cannot give a definite answer.
Dragon Age: Origins
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt
Pathologic 2
DOOM Eternal
Disco Elysium: The Final Cut
Best comments
Well, it’s difficult with mayorishness in games, because Doomguy, given as an example, actually dies in the gameplay, which greatly disrupts the effect of “he’s the boss in the room and nothing ever threatens him” (or the save loads are somehow written into the lore?). And this whole plot flair works to give the necessary atmosphere and tone to what is happening.
I can’t agree with the author’s point https://clemensspillehalcasino.co.uk/ of view. Firstly, if we take the same Doom (2016), then, as already noted, there is a serious dissonance between the narrative and the gameplay. In words we are the great destroyer of demons, whom all devils are afraid of, but in reality (especially on high difficulties) you will sweat in every skirmish with hellish creatures. In addition, I believe that this positioning of Doomguy was done on purpose in contrast to how he was shown in old games.
Secondly, even in Mary’s other examples, Sussibility is not particularly noticeable. Geralt? So he is not omnipotent, not all situations can be solved by force, and in general they can be solved in such a way that everyone is happy. It would be nice if we were talking about Ciri. Gray Guardian? And how is its ideality manifested??
Well, in some small quests the solutions are usually simple, but in something more global they are no longer. Baron's Quest, for example. Quest with the murder of Radovid and the subsequent outcome of the war. DLC main quests. Battle of Kaer Morhen.
By the way I can't understand. BG3 and Disco Elysium are examples of games with imperfect protagonists, but if you abuse the save/lod to knock out the ideal option, then they are already a Mary Sue. At the same time, in games like DAO and The Witcher, where the ideal option, in your understanding, is possible to choose, but is not necessary, you brand them as mercurial in general?
In fact, if we extend your line of reasoning, then any game protagonist is a Mary Sue. After all, the protagonist is the player, and the other characters are just NPCs, which means he is special by default. And the game world really revolves around the player, who, through his avatar in the form of the main character, is told some kind of story or is presented with gameplay. Therefore, inevitably the protagonist will find himself in the thick of things and go all the way to the end. And if you take games with choice and the creation of a character like the same DAO, then this line between the player and the hero is even thinner, since the main character is not even a full-fledged character, but simply a projection of the player who has the advantages and disadvantages exactly those that the player himself wants to give him.
In my short gaming experience, I have come across another game without Mary Sue – Disco Elysium. I was there for only two days, but already there I noticed that although Desbois is an excellent police officer with incredible productivity, he can’t do everything. The player is constantly asked to test the hero's abilities. The player may boot after another failure or simply skip the check. These players want to play as a Mary Sue?
If a character can do everything, just because of randomness sometimes something doesn’t work out for him, then this character is not a Mary Sue, but if everything works out for him, because of a safe scam or if the player is very lucky with randomness, then this character becomes a Mary Sue? How does this work? Great luck is one of the characteristics of a Mary Sue, but not the only one.
I was confused by Geralt in the preview.I just immediately have a flashback from the first game, about the first boss Barghest, he humiliated me so many times on medium difficulty that there’s no need to talk about the Mary-Sewness of the Witcher
Topic not covered. I understand your thesis, but, in my opinion, here we need to dig into the difference between “mericiousness” and the concept of power fantasy (in Russian, the embodiment of the dream of omnipotence). And note that Doomguy, Dante from Devil May Cry, or Neo from The Matrix – while they have cool advantages, they still have to face obstacles and overcome difficulties, and the fact that they win in the end does not make them a Marty Sue (Marty is the male version of this trope).
I understand your indignation, but the topic there is much broader than the points that you voiced
We should first establish clear boundaries for the heroicness of heroes in games, so everyone offers their own formulation and it turns out to be a mess
Initially, the general definition implies a super-strong character who already defeats everyone, and almost any heroic work (especially a game) will be a “hero vs antagonist -> hero wins” scheme
In principle, this is the lot of some very low-grade plots or fan fiction
The example with Geralt is indicative in this regard, because here there is literally a substitution of concepts and the appropriation of any victory (which follows from the video game format of his adventures; it would be strange to complete a quest in the middle of the game and, as a reward, see a castscene where Geralt is hit with a tambourine) into the bag of arguments for being a mayor
Geralt is an experienced mercenary with superhuman powers, who is able to solve only those problems that directly depend on his skills and abilities. Therefore, success awaits Geralt in all sidequests, since it is the player who directs him to complete them and Geralt, in fact, does his job. And when it comes to the Baron and saving Ciri, then simply waving your fists will not help.
In principle, it is worth making an important clarification here that a Mary Sue should not be just strong, it should be unreasonably and “poorly developed” strong. The executioner of doom is some kind of almost a deity, some Dante is also not a person, but Mary Jane, who, without any skills or training, knocks out a bunch of elite soldiers?
IMHO, very bad examples for the indicator of mercifulness were chosen by the author. Although why go far, I would take Hogwarts Legacy (the game is cool by the way), there the hero is simply the embodiment of a Mary Sue. Here, in most cases, the indicator for me is how hard he tries to get something. So, Geralt suffered a lot of Shinanigans during his life, but did not become omnipotent, just as Doomguy “sweats”. Yes, he is a legendary executioner, but he continues to sweat to live up to his status.
As far as I know, the Doomguy in the rebooted series is also not entirely human. In Eternal, a scientist says in an audio diary that his strength and endurance are beyond human capabilities. There is a theory in the fandom that this is the Archangel Michael. So, citing him as an example of a Mary Sue is not very correct in principle.
Well, “Mary Sue” is a type, an archetype, and it will apply to anyone: even an ant, even God. Just with Marysyush’s heroes, you always have to ask the question: “What does the work give in return??»
After this loss, time seems to freeze. Neither the pestilence nor Loghain do anything while we gather an army and decide the fate of all the mages of Ferelden, the Dalish tribe, the kingdom of the dwarves and, finally, all of Ferelden. Along the way, we also emerge victorious from the conflict described in the prologue.
To be fair. players will be the first to start yelling if there is a time limit in games. There are such games and players usually get burned out from them
I actually wrote about Disco Elysium. I didn't play BG3 enough to talk about it. You write that influencing the luck parameter turns the GG into a Mary Sue. With the same logic, you can turn soldiers from X-com into Mary Sues using safescam. But that's not true. DuBois is a trained detective, and the X-com soldier is a trained soldier. It is training that distinguishes them from Mary Sue, who does not need them, because.To. she initially knows and can do everything.
This is true, but films work on a slightly different principle. Regarding cinema, a person is an outside observer, not an actor. Roughly speaking, in movies, all the characters are NPCs, individuals who operate only within the fictional world. They won’t munch, they won’t cheat save/lod, they don’t need to come up with gameplay to make life more interesting for them, they will act in accordance with the given character, or at least stupidly according to the script.
Yes, where he quickly and effortlessly overcomes? Even if you throw away a million save-loads, this does not mean that the player did not sweat during the playthrough, dodging a million projectiles. Well, either the game is running on easy, but then it’s a sin to complain about ease.
Well, game characters can only be accused of being merciful if their suffering in gameplay is completely ignored. Judging by the achievements for the 2016 version, half of all Doomguys did not reach hell. Not much of a winner. This is even if you don’t take into account the fact that any zombie can shoot it with a photo gun.
While there is no guarantee of passing, these are not the luckiest, not the strongest, etc.d. heroes.
No, if you’re talking about a player, then that’s where the mercifulness should be attributed. Doomguy doesn't do much on his own.
And in any case, all this does not negate the fact that in half of the scenarios Doomguy did not live to see the finale, and in those scenarios where he did survive, he reached the goal with all his might.
The bottom line at the gameplay level can be reduced to two aspects: the player’s desire to increase his skill and the ceiling of his skill, which can also grow. Or not, but this, again, may refer to the first aspect. Another thing is that the phenomenon of mayorishness rather belongs to plot and narrative issues.
In general, I think in the case of Doom this could be fixed by the fact that Doomguy is a sadist and is specially holding back in order to play with demons like a cat and a mouse. Well, this is the work of the authors, especially since I am a new doom (2016 is new for me. everything is fine) didn’t pass and I don’t know how it suits the character
Until the character gets the “smart” trait and then begins to vacillate from “I can predict who the villain is by a cat’s fart” to a complete idiot throughout the entire work. Infuriating
In order for a character to be a Mary Sue in a game, it is necessary to combine both artistic splendor and game-mechanical excellence, this implies the presence of “immortality” of the character (without external cheats / trainers), or a plot-based endless rebirth / rewinding of time, etc. And in the case of puzzles or dialogues with choice options – clear hints on their results.
