No, I’m not (intentionally) blog-fading! I’ve just been busy catching up with things at work and getting back into the swing of flying around. I do have several posts in my head but between work, recuperating from fatigue from work (touchy subject with all the fuss over the Colgan 3407 crash but yes, I just went there!), and a bit of gaming, the writing has taken a back seat.
While chatting with Karen on Skype recently, the whole “avatar” discussion was brought up. I said I had a post in mind, because to a degree I’ve already written a previous post which briefly brought up a part of the topic and my opinion is still the same on that matter. But I said I’d wait until I finished listening to Shut Up, We’re Talking #47 before doing so. I probably won’t delve specifically into the whole Noblegarden “Shake Your Bunny Maker” achievement which caused the recent blog debates to begin with, nor will this post touch the Raph vs. Tobold debate on avatars as tokens. I’ll get to that, but I’ll use this to launch a short mini-series on various prevalent debates then bring them all together with my Final Word (uh oh, did I just channel Jerry Springer? 
) on the subject.
So. Avatars or Characters? As I stated in my Player vs. Character post, I consider the terms “avatar” and “character” to be two entirely different things.
Background and experiences directly influence our opinions and perspectives on everything in life. The reason, as I see it, that I cringe when I hear people call their characters “avatars” is because I started my multiplayer gaming back in high school with AD&D and other tabletop RPGs. In a tabletop RPG, you create and play the game through a character we create and whose statistics, equipment, and notes are kept and updated on a character sheet. In the tabletop RPG environment at the time, the only time I remember seeing the term “avatar” was always in reference to a physical manifestation of a deity, never in regards to a player’s character.
On the other side of the coin, we have “avatars” which in my background and experiences were representative of the actual person (or persona) behind the name or icon. On a forum or instant message client we can select a graphic avatar image to represent us. In a 3D chat client we select a virtual avatar to represent ourselves. That also applies to Xbox Live, Sony’s Home for PS3 and Nintendo’s Mii’s for their Wii console. If I play an online multiplayer game, say a shooter or racing game, or a flight combat/simulator, same thing — the avatar is representing me, the player (or persona) behind the pixels.
On the surface, that’s how I split hairs between the two terms. Does that make my interpretation correct and everyone else’s wrong? No. It’s only “correct” for me.
From the little bit of reading I managed to do, it seems I get to point the finger at Richard Garriott’s Ultima series for the current trend of “avatar” and “character” being interchangeable. In Ultima I-III you played a character of your creation like you’d do in any RPG. However, Ultima IV introduced an alignment system to the series. In the story, your character becomes sort of a spiritual leader to the Brittanian people and if you chose to guide your character to achieve “enlightened” status in every virtue, your character became their Avatar. Subsequent Ultima games picked up where IV left off, so your character was already an Avatar and was constantly referred to as such. This led the new generation of players coming into the series automatically calling their characters “avatars” rather than simply “characters” like we old school RPGers called them just a c,ouple years before back when we had to roll our D20′s barefoot in the snow, uphill both ways. Oh, and you kids get off our lawns!
In short, Avatar versus Character is all Richard Garriott’s fault! 
Loading ...
on 
Entries (RSS)
Hmm, I’d rather hear “avatar” than “toon”, that just bothers me for some reason. I do prefer character tho. Where do you stand on “toon”?
I think the problem lies in the fact that in the original Ultima game you played one character, so in fact that character represented you in the game world. There was also the confusion of Richard Garriott also being known as Lord British which was his avatar or God infused mortal in the world.
As MMO’s progressed you were allowed more characters to create so there was never truly one “Avatar” that represented the player in the virtual world. True, you don’t have to play multiple characters, but with the option now firmly in place, you can’t really use the word “Avatar” when discussing your representative in the gaming world. They are more or less referred to as Toons, or characters and have less valued meaning as an actual “Avatar” would, I think.
Again, all of this is subjective and stylized to the individual playing the game. If they role play their one and only character then it might take on a more “Avatar” feel than someone who has eight 80 level characters and spends most of their time making money and farming the crap out of Northrend.
I’m curious to read the next in the series.
@Oak: My point is that in Ultima (or any other RPG that didn’t use pre-made characters) the character did not represent me, Scott, the player. I was role-playing the part of that character. The real me may have been deciding all the choices in the game but I always try to make up a sort of personality for the characters I create. I have my own personal way of “light RP” and that’s all part of it. For MMO’s, I can spend a lot of time on the character creation screens clicking on the classes and looks, reading the descriptions and considering my own interpretation for the class and what my mood, the game’s audio-visuals, etc. inspire me to envision the protagonist in the game’s story that I want to identify with and guide through the adventures. But again, that’s all because of my tabletop RPG background, and I would not expect players without that background to be able to relate to it.
@Diane: Ugh… ya know, originally when I got into MMOs and kept hearing “toon” being bandied about, I was just disgusted. I think eventually I just heard it so much that I took a “when in Rome” approach and adopted it myself. I don’t say it often, but if it happens to pop out of my mouth I just let it go; it’s one syllable as opposed to three. I still don’t like it necessarily, but I hear it constantly, whereas I only hear “avatar” in blogs and forums; I can’t think of a single time in any game over the years that I read anyone calling their character an avatar in chat.
Anyone remember “Worlds Chat” and it simple “Avatars” that you could use to run around and chat with others?
THAT is an Avatar to me.
I attempt to think of my game pieces as “characters” . I will even go to the extreme of having an outlook for that character and may even make sure he (or she) does something specific in the game to tell them apart in guild chat.
Certain way of speaking, certain way to type or certain characters used in chat..
But, it is what I do.
This whole issue on what rights we have over these pieces..deals with other areas of discussion with how the developers treat these “characters”/”avatars” as if the player who created them do not own them.
When we sign that EULA (i.e: by clicking OK) we give away the rights to those characters.
They can change the way your armor looks, the way your home or horse looks, and yes, the way your face looks.
It is THEIR property.
It is like a loan from the bank. We do not own the item until it is paid for.
The characters are NEVER fully paid for if you think about it.
Thus, we have no major rights within these games, and the only way we can control our own rights is to go on strike…
Quit that game when a change takes place you hate. Yell it out that the change sucks, and leave the game..
Watch how fast they will fix it.
But, no, forums are used, and threads are deleted, and we live on with the fact that we have no control.
Welcome to the MMO.
What? No talk of “toon”?
That’ll teach me for not reading the comments before posting.
Oh wait, no it won’t.
I’ve never cared much one way or the other about “toon”. For me, nothings more irritating than “lol”, especially the way some people feel the need to use it as punctuation.
Scott, you’re right on about avatar vs. character, for me an avatar is a virtual representation of me whereas a character is a role I take up in game.
I agree that they are separate entities from my perspective, but everyone is different. Some people spend a considerable amount of time working on these characters that they won’t just delete them when they get bored of the game. They will even take offense when people make fun of the name they have chosen. If it truly was just a token or game piece, people wouldn’t be that sensitive.