Forum:Vote: Standardized terminology for referring to player/player character

Forums: Index > Wiki proposals and applications > Vote: Standardized terminology for referring to player/player character

I would like to propose a small change to the editing guidelines, namely, to return to the encyclopedic form "the player" (which is the standard on Wikipedia, to whose Manual of Style we refer in general; see here), instead of the awkward "the player character", which was added in 2013 by Janaschi (I can't find the specific vote where this was introduced).

The term "player character" has several problems:

1. It's not accurate. The player character is the avatar of the player and it is not making any decisions. Writing "the player character can choose to" is factually incorrect; "the player can choose to" is correct and is an encyclopedic statement of fact, because the player makes the choice.
2. It's superfluous in cases where it might be used. In situations where we have to refer to the player character itself, we use their name (Courier, Vault Dweller, Sole Survivor, El Dubya etc.), e.g. "The Vault Dweller leaves the Vault in 2161".
3. It's reinventing the wheel. As stated above, Wikipedia and other major wikis (like Wookiepedia, see here) also use "player", not "player character". Using a different term should not be just for the sake of being different.

"Player" also connects nicely with "they" and allows for avoiding the use of ambiguous "one". "One" namely who? It's a roundabout method of using "the player".

So this is basically a proposal to return to the 2013 "the player" form, which is something that's pretty much the standard for all large wiki projects. Perhaps expanded:

Recommended terms:

1. Player when referring to player activities in the game, such as taking actions in quests, selecting dialogue, or shooting non-player characters in the face: "The player can choose to spare Pretty Boy Floyd or drop a live mine on his head."
   
2. Player character or the name of the player character when referring to the actual player character, such as when discussing customization, the character system, or similar: "The player character's appearance cannot be customized in Fallout or Fallout 2 beyond choosing their sex." The name can be used when referring to them as a character in a story, such as when discussing storyline events: "Mr House takes an interest in the Courier after they reach New Vegas after being shot in the head."

The original discussion can be found here: here. I took the liberty of parsing a few comments from there:

“That said, over the years it's gotten more and more apparent that using "the player character" is unwieldy and superfluous in every place it's being used. I'm in support of changing it back, but would like to note that this is a pretty big project by itself.”— bleep196

“There are important distinctions between the player and the player character, so the two should not be used interchangeably.

The surrounding sentence structure is one point which I think determines a great deal of applicability for any term, as what the player character does and what the player does, are connected but functionally different. The protagonists are afforded opportunities to act and are affected by world events, whereas the player determines the choices made when such opportunities are presented but does not carry out the action.

For instance, “the Courier may side with the NCR, House, or Legion.” But the decision is the player’s alone to make, Courier makes no such choice as a necessary story beat or scripted event. So it would be equally correct to say “the player may choose to side the NCR, House, or Legion.” To that end, using player character is not unlike using the protagonist’s name. However, the player name is more specific and we lose nothing by using it primarily. The use of player character contributes to needless confusion, as evidenced by this forum, and in no way benefits us more than simply using the character name.

As outlined above, using player character should only be reserved for instances where it applies to mechanics within the game, such as character customization. Essentially instances where there is a clear delineation between the player and the player character: the player does not alter their own face at a wasteland surgeon, they alter the character’s face.

I would also argue that it aught to be applicable for instances of inventory management such as equipping items or use consumables, and such distinctions, should the guideline be amended, is something that will needed to be considered and codified. Otherwise individual pages a dozen times over turn into smaller battlegrounds as that conversation is had disjointed and likely as a result of contested edits.

Looking at other notable wikis, Dragon Age explicitly uses player and not player character. I would hold that series as an example of one which offer as many opportunities for player choice, if not more, as well as having cutscenes wherein the the protagonist may actually make scripted decisions, independent of the player.”— The Dyre Wolf

“I do agree with Tag that there is a distinction between "the player" and "the player character", and it's stupid to remove all uses of "the player". However, I think there's some discussion to be had about which one is appropriate in which cases. I think it all comes down to the perspective our wiki has on the Fallout universe”— FDekker

I've also promised an example of how the policy would look in practice. Here's an example:

• Background uses Chosen One, as it flows neatly and is a summary of the context.
• Walkthrough uses player when referring to player actions and choices (eg. selecting dialogue options) and player character when referring to elements related directly to the player character (such as getting paid or getting past guards).

To answer User:Gilpo1's concerns: This is not intended to start major projects aimed at correcting every instance of "player character", but simply to establish a guideline for new and old users, wondering how to write in third person. Tägäżïël 07:24, 29 March 2021 (UTC)

Votes

Poll finished on 9:00 am April 5, 2021 (UTC).

• A consensus must be reached by voting before any action is taken.
• You can vote by placing one of the following lines in the appropriate section:
  • Use # {{yes}} ~~~~ if you support the proposal.
  • Use # {{no}} ~~~~ if you are against the proposal.
  • Use # {{neutral}} ~~~~ if you wish to abstain.
• Please do not edit other user's votes.

Yes

1. Tägäżïël 07:24, 29 March 2021 (UTC)
2. Key Mace (talk) 07:33, 29 March 2021 (UTC)
3. Digital Utopia (talk) 07:52, 29 March 2021 (UTC)
4. I agree that "player" should be used in all instances where an action or decision being taken by the player is required. The Appalachian (talk) 13:01, 29 March 2021 (UTC)
5. Gilpo1 (talk) 15:05, 29 March 2021 (UTC)
6. LovinglyGaslight (talk) 15:40, 29 March 2021 (UTC)
7. Often found this issue a bit strange, so hopefully this makes things better. Crimson Knight (talk) 16:39, 29 March 2021 (UTC)
8. Devastating Dave^{ZIP ZAP RAP} 21:55, 29 March 2021 (UTC)
9. It's hard to write a song with bitter fingers (talk)
10. New California Ahoy ^{"Who are you, that do not know their history?"} 00:51, 30 March 2021 (UTC)
11. Nonstopmaximum (talk) 02:05, 30 March 2021 (UTC)
12. Q('_'Q)

No

1. While as a meta commentary the player is making decisions, in the case of the game world it is the player character that is making the decisions as the player doesn't exist. -Eckserah ^{Head Dataminer} 07:34, 29 March 2021 (UTC)
2. Per Ecks AllYourFavorites (talk) 12:35, 29 March 2021 (UTC)
3. Here I'm solidarity with Eckserah. ExplorerSmaily (talk) 16:45, 29 March 2021 (UTC)
4. Same as Ecks, and I also feel it'll confuse new editors more. Aiden4017 (talk) 22:47, 29 March 2021 (UTC)

Neutral

1. I'm fine with either. - FDekker ^(talk) 08:34, 29 March 2021 (UTC)
2. Neutral leaning "yes"; I agree that when discussing things in a meta context (gameplay, quest walkthroughs, etc.) we should use "player" since the "player character" is, meta-wise, an avatar that does nothing unless the player inputs commands and thus cannot be said to have any capacity to make decisions, but I don't really have strong feelings about this matter. - DirtyBlue929 (talk) 17:26, 29 March 2021 (UTC)

Excluded votes

1. misterhaan (talk) User does not meet requirements for voting (no edits or /d posts prior to vote).
2. Anthony 1l (talk) User does not meet requirements for voting (no edits or /d posts prior to vote).

Comments

Regarding meta commentary: We are supposed to be an encyclopedia and thus accurate, rather than confuse the reader. This is a wiki that covers the subject from a meta point of view, after all. Tägäżïël 12:55, 29 March 2021 (UTC)

Not sure how you're going to do this without a overhaul project, because if we just use it going forward new editors will see every page using player character and assume that is what they're meant to be using, assuming they are trying to follow the style of the wiki. If we don't make it retroactive, it will just make newer pages inconsistent with the older ones, which we'll have to deal with eventually, even if you don't want a overhaul project right now. Aiden4017 (talk) 22:45, 29 March 2021 (UTC)