This question’s been sitting in my askbox for WEEKS now, apologies for taking so long to respond to this!
To preface this post it’s important to note:I’m not a professional, and don’t have professional experience. All thoughts are based on personal opinion, preference, and prior experience designing characters for personal projects!
Click the jump for a big post with me rambling about character designs I do and don’t like, and why I do/don’t like them!
Aside from somehow managing to revive the undead “Overwatch vs. Paladins/Battleborn” controversy horse to beat it further when everyone’s moved the fuck on, I really don’t understand how a purple spikey swordguy with a sword and a generic WW1 pilot are groundbreaking and risk-taking, while a Greek-inspired mutant with a long arm, a walking skull, and a homage to bad and cheesy kid-friendly Sentai shows of actors in spandex and heavy plastic outfits are horrible.
I probably shouldn’t entertain a response that starts with
“Aside from somehow managing to revive the undead “Overwatch vs. Paladins/Battleborn” controversy horse to beat it further when everyone’s moved the fuck on”
But I believe it’s important to discuss why people don’t think character designs don’t look good or are dysfunctional. If nobody says anything, nothing gets done and nobody learns. I’m not reviving controversy, I’m giving my thoughts on a subject I care about: character design in the media. ANYWAYS-
Gigantic’s characters are risky because they’re considerably unorthodox compared to something like Overwatch or Battlerite, who’s characters shapes/silhouettes rely heavily on what they’re wearing or wielding. People like what they’re familiar with, and the characters in games like that are shaped as safely as they are because it’s familiar and relatable to broad audiences.
What you’ve done is boil down characters to their most basic surface elements. I’ve said it before, I’ll say it again: The risk in Gigantic’s designs come from their unique stylized anatomy. They’ve succeeded in stylizing them and making them look great on top of that initial risk, here’s a little sketch-over to show you why they all look so good:
From top to bottom and left to right:
Uncles Sven is comprised of circles. His body is a big sphere, his flasks (or at least the main ones) are spheres, his nose is round enough and the symbols on his pants/belt thing imply closed circular forms. Circles are a soft, safe shape, and that implication is reflected in the characters cheerful, friendly personality. Sven is a weird guy and that’s exhibited through his bouncy animation in game.
Mozu is a triangle with a bunch of other triangles and sharp edges. Her hat, cloak, sleeves and ears are all triangles. The ornate details on her cloak are triangles, the coloring on her tail’s zig-zags are triangles. A triangle’s sharp edges can imply a character is evil, the those points can be very dangerous! However, Mozu’s sharp edges are to emphasize her chaotic nature. She’s a playful, trickster goblin who stole those wands and practice magic she’s clearly not meant to practice!
Voden’s shapes all taper out, as if the forms within are growing outwards. Voden is a forest guardian and serves as sort of a sentinel of the natural world, it’s only fitting that his fur, horns and tail are as exuberant as the life in nature he works to protect.
Aisling and her father Sir Cador are comprised of two complimentary shapes. Cador was slain but still serves in his spiritual state to protect his daughter. Aisling wears her father’s coat while wielding his sword: both are much to big for her and contribute to this bottom heavy shape that could be interpreted as a sort of sad shape. The downward flow is typically associated with feelings of grief. To contrast that, Sir Cador’s shape is built up, it’s uplifting and valiant! It shows even in death he has the strength and courage to help protect his daughter on the battlefield. They’re both two pieces that fit together perfectly!
I promise you there’s more of this in the cast: all over the cast in every characters. It’s not always immediately recognizable on the surface, some characters have a bit more nuance to their theming through shape and form.
Battleborn is a misstep because their forms not only lack anything significant behind them, but are in service of nothing. Characters are filled to the brim with worthless ornate lines and embellishments that don’t mean anything. If I had to choose one character as the best of that awful bunch, it’d be the mushroom man, but nothing about him really “wows” me like anything in Gigantic, or the best Overwatch has to offer.
Overwatch is wasted potential but doesn’t look horrible in most cases except for Zarya, who I think has a legitimately bad design. Roadhog is the most well thought-out design in the game and pushes their restricted stylized anatomy to their outer-limits.
I made that post hoping to give someone insight on why I think some character designs works, and why I think some don’t in relation to these similar multiplayer games. No ill-will is meant with these discussions and I answered as honestly as I could. Again, I’m not a professional and these opinions are formed from personal thought and are by no means a guideline to what’s right and wrong with character design.
