Alternative Character Interpretation / Video Games: T to Z

Alternative Character Interpretation Main Video Games Subpage
A - F | G - L | M - S | T - Z

---

T

• Team Fortress 2, having an Excuse Plot and paper-thin characterization, can support a variety of interpretations, though beginning with the recent WAR update each major revamp has started to fill in the backstories a bit more. Some fans attempt to stay within the framework of the information provided, others throw all of that out the window and create a number of Sailor Earth-types who are more or less just "my character, as this Class".
• Azazel from Tekken. In the franchise, he's the ultimate evil. In MasterOfNintendo's MLP fanfiction series, he's the powerful, loyal, truly good husband of Celestia and king of all Equestria.
• Terraria: There has been discussion about whether the player character is a Villain Protagonist. After all, while there are bosses who attack without provocation (like the Eye of Cthulhu and the three mechanical bosses), most bosses need to be summoned with an item. Others, like Queen Bee or Plantera, only attack after the player destroys their progeny. Are they truly malevolent, or just victims of a Blood Knight who destroys everything in his or her path?
• An awful lot of people are convinced that Lara Croft is a Sociopathic Hero due to her willingness to violently gun down not just criminals and monsters, human and non-human), but also endangered animals and even security guards and police officers (though they do attack her), and also her apparent lack of respect for the ancient sites she raids. Robot Chicken even parodied this in one of their sketches.
• Touhou Project needs to get special mention here. Beyond the absurdly high fanon-to-canon-material ratio meaning there's a ton of this to begin with, UFO's A and B paths not only affect the characters abilities but their personalities as well. So Reimu is either driven primarily by a need for money or out of genuine concern for people, and both versions are equally canon.
  • When she was first introduced, Kaguya was seen as a heartless Manipulative Bitch who toyed with men for her own amusement — in other words, how Fujiwara no Mokou views her, though her perception is a bit jaundiced because her own father was one of Kaguya's rejected suitors. Then the semi-canon gag manga Inaba of the Moon & Inaba of the Earth came along and revolutionized the fanon portrayal of Kaguya by showing her as sheltered and naive but ultimately kind-hearted and well-meaning. And then there are the fans who interpret her as a lazy, apathetic NEET who spends all day playing video games.
  • ZUN himself commented on Reimu in her character profile in Strange Creators of Outer World, saying that this applies to her in-universe. Notably, in the games she looks far more noble since she's "on the clock" and actively protecting Gensokyo from whatever threatens it; meanwhile in the canon manga like Wild and Horned Hermit she's "off the clock" and is portrayed as lazy, money-grubbing, and forever pursuing Get Rich Quick Schemes. Since there's never been a story told specifically from Reimu's perspective, everyone has a different idea on who Reimu is, causing her to have drastic changes in personality.
  • Really, pick any character and you will find at least three of these floating around somewhere. Reimu, overworked Barrier Maiden trying her best to handle the various superpowered beings she is meant to prevent from causing trouble or a Fantastic Racist that would exterminate them all given the opportunity? Marisa, well-meaning but impetuous or a sadistic youkai hunter? Yukari, secretly protecting Gensokyo from behind the scenes, amoral Omniscient Morality License holder with the power to support it or simply a lazy woman who will get to that eventually? Cirno, a determined but overconfident and simplistic fairy or just plain Too Dumb to Live? Flandre, a Cheerful Child that doesn't entirely comprehend her ridonkulous levels of power or an Axe-Crazy monster hiding behind a facade — if there's even a facade at all? Yuyuko, intelligent but occasionally absent-minded or an airheaded ditz with a desire for food equaled only by a black hole? Alice, tsundere who just wants friends but doesn't know how to make them, the only sane woman surrounded by gibbering maniacs, or creepy, yandere doll-otaku who's best shunned?
  • In the case of Flandre, recent canon material seems to be a mix of all of them.

U

• Ultima:
  • Lord British is a genocidal cult leader who who conquered the planet by ruthlessly crushing all who oppose him and enforcing a state religion of his own devising
  • The Avatar is an Ax-Crazy psychopath who acts as British's attack dog, and is allied with him only so he can murder everyone around him with impunity and royal sanction
• Due to the nature of Umineko: When They Cry, it practically breathes this trope. What really happened in 1986? Was there a real culprit, or was everything just magic? Are Shannon and Kanon real people, or actually Yasu in disguise? Is Beatrice one person, or several? When considering who's real and who's not, you can end up with an endless array of mystery/fantasy stories. But the most important question, which drives the whole plot and is never truly answered, is "Magic or Trick"?
  • There's a whole lot of this in-universe, especially between Battler and Ange's perspective of characters. The final game was created by Battler specifically to remind Ange of the loving family who had fun together, rather than the worst characterizations that the Wild Mass Guessing 'Witch Hunt' fanatics speculated.
• Nathan Drake of Uncharted is presented as an unlucky everyman. However, people have taken issue with this to varying degrees, with his alternate characterization ranging from merely too skilled to be an everyman to a murderer, but one you'd buy a drink for in a bar to a mass murderer to a full-blown sadistic sociopath. Nate stays jokey almost the whole time he kills the numerous mercenaries after him and sometimes seems a bit too eager for violence. For instance, there's a museum infiltration level where Nate says he doesn't want to kill anyone, but his non-lethal takedowns still include neck snaps and he throws an unaware guard over a hundred feet down into the ocean, in a series that usually averts Soft Water. You can see the guard swimming away, but even the developers admit this is a cop-out. In Drake's Deception, Marlowe actually brings this up, claiming he gets off on violence, before completely discarding that line of thought.
• Unpacking: The boyfriend; a controlling jerk who refused to accommodate the protagonist when she moved into his apartment, or simply someone who was used to living a minimalistic lifestyle and simply wasn't able to live with someone with a more casual outlook? While the boyfriend didn't move his belongings for the protagonist, she is allowed to move them herself, suggesting that he trusted her. Additionally, was the break-up an awful one, given that the protagonist either can't bear to look at her ex-boyfriend's photograph or sticks a pin through his face, or was she just reeling because she really cared for him and is struggling in the aftermath? Given that she's still into making coffee the same way he does, using the same equipment no less, the protagonist isn't traumatised by her time with him.
• In Until Dawn, this can be applied to many of the characters due to the game mechanics and story.
  • The amount of involvement Chris had with Hannah's prank is unclear. He may have known nothing about it, knew about it and let it slide or just let it happened, even getting Josh drunk so the others could pull off the prank.
  • Hannah's crush on Mike was doomed from the start but there was the fact that she knowingly went after her friend's boyfriend and openly pined for him, so she could be seen less sympathetic and innocent as claimed.
  • Ashley potentially condemning Chris to die. Many fans see her as vindictive and heartless, leaving Chris to be killed by the Wendigo because Ashley felt betrayed by Chris's potential earlier actions to save himself rather than her. Another occasion was when Emily was bitten by a Wendigo and Ashley wanted to throw the former out to certain death. Is she a Bitch in Sheep's Clothing who is only concerned about her wellbeing and shifts the blame to others? Or is she an anxious Nice Girl placed in an extremely traumatic and stressful situation and sincerely sorry for her actions?
  • A subtle one is Mike, should the player choose to kill Emily out of fear that her Wendigo bite was infectious. If the player checks his Character Traits after the deed, his "Funny" and "Honest" traits oddly go up. Was Mike amused that he had just shot someone, his ex-girlfriend to be exact? Or was he writing it off as a joke to cope with the mental trauma?
  • It's left up to interpretation whether or not Mike and Emily were having an affair and cheating with their respective partners. They are Amicable Exes and their relationship stats are surprisingly high and they remain rather friendly and close with each other. Some say they aren't cheating but aren't entirely over each other. Others say they did cheat but by the time Ashley saw them hugging through the telescope, they decided for the sake of their new relationships to move on. While Mike is coping with it well, Emily isn't, hence her picking a fight with Jessica.
  • Josh's motives for the elaborate prank on his friends are unclear. He first claims it was revenge on them for his sisters' disappearance, but then talks about how it was done for the sake of becoming famous by uploading the prank online. He also says it was done to get his best friend Chris to confess to his crush Ashley.
    • There is also his reasoning for picking on Sam, Chris and Ashley for his prank - the three characters who were the least involved with his sisters' prank. One interpretation was that Josh chose Sam and Chris in particular because they were the closest to him and he felt most betrayed by their potential involvement of the prank. A different interpretation was that Josh simply meant to prank everyone and was getting the people least involved done first. Another popular interpretation was that Josh wanted to make Sam and Chris the heroes if the prank was uploaded and went viral, while simultaneously projecting his own self loathing that he couldn't help his sisters onto Sam and Chris.
    • Another argument was that Josh legitimately thought his friends wouldn't take the prank seriously and they would just laugh it off with him. It's difficult to tell, due to Josh's warped perception of reality, whether Josh genuinely wanted or intended to hurt his friends versus him honestly believing it was all a game (with the intention to still hurt his friends).

V

• Valkyria Chronicles has a few of these:
  • Faldio's motives. Did he shoot Alicia because it was the only trump card he had and nobody else had any better ideas? Or was he just plain power-hungry and jealous of Welkin?
    • Faldio: irredeemable asshole who jumped at the chance to shoot his best friend's girl as much out of jealousy as patriotism, or the only person with the guts to choose the many over the one when his back was against the wall? It's usually a matter of how you feel about the romance plot.
  • There's also Welkin: the game plays up the idea that he's a cute, well-meaning nature-nerd who only wants to save his country so he go home and be a teacher, but some fans speculate that he's got a nasty Jerkass streak, and isn't actually that smart — mainly that he seems very comfortable with ignoring Alicia's existential crisis until it's time for him to save the day, he physically assaulted Faldio because he couldn't argue with his logic, and anyone with any kind of deductive reasoning could have told that the river was shallower where there were plants growing up out of it.
    • Welkin in general. Is he the sweet, good-hearted biology genius the story makes him out to be? Or are the conspicuous lapses in his intelligence hinting at something darker under the surface?
  • Jaeger. Renegade lone wolf cooperating with his oppressors just enough to keep them off his back, or opportunistic Karma Houdini out for his own best interests?
• Unsurprisingly for a game with a lot of deceit, Vampire: The Masquerade - Bloodlines has a fair amount of this.
  • Velvet Velour. Is she a Toreador still full of passion for life and too gentle to handle the harsher parts of her unlife? Or is she a Toreador who likes to manipulate others into doing all her dirty work for her? On the one hand she does look away from your sire's execution, she firmly forbids you from killing innocent humans, and Toreador usually aren't the most aggressive clan. On the other hand she gets much colder if you push her to handle any of it, or demand some kind of payment for killing a vampire hunter and a vampire leaking secrets.
  • Maximilian Strauss. Is he really a better person than LaCroix, or just much more pragmatic? He is willing to turn on LaCroix if convinced of the need, but he's also the same person who created a gargoyle^note a process that would have used the blood of vampires from multiple other clans and refused its request for freedom.
  • Isaac. Is he really that supportive of Anarch ideas of freedom and just tries to keep things under control in Hollywood? Or is he no different from the Camarilla and just doesn't want to answer to someone else? He's openly against LaCroix and urges you to switch sides, but he also regularly demands any newcomer perform a service for him before he'll let them do anything in his territory, and even after you give him the tape he sent you for he insists on you finding a complete one.
• View from Below:
  • How much does the Crimson God actually care about Delilah? On one hand, he does seem to feel sorry for her when she's shot and killed. On the other hand, he's the one who tempted her into evil in the first place and he treats her soul pieces, Iris and Rose, as mere pawns.
  • The Crimson God doesn't directly punish his followers for taking too long to capture Ash. While this can be seen as Even Evil Has Standards, it can also be seen as Pragmatic Villainy, since the Crimson God is running both the Crimson Skulls and Pieties, allowing him to turn the mortals' quest into a suicide mission in his favor and win even if the Crimson Skulls fail. On the other hand, it's surprising he isn't more punishing towards his minions for failing to protect his soul pieces, which weakens him to the point where two mortals can kill him. On the third hand, by tying their lives to Rose, he ensures that they're automatically punished if they bungle their jobs hard enough to let their leader die.

W

• Warcraft fans like to make these up. Bringing them up on a forum can cause Flame Wars, so beware.
  • The Night Elves: From the Alliance perspective, a peaceful, beautiful, spiritual race; purple Na'vi with magic and big ears. From the Horde perspective, however, they're a bunch of reclusive, omnicidal, xenophobic snobs.
  • Thrall: The Jesus of Azeroth, a power-hungry, warlike despot who just fools people into thinking he cares about the orcs' traditions and freedom to keep his power, or a weak, naive fool, who lets himself be manipulated by the true evils of Azeroth, such as the Forsaken and the Blood Elves? This seems to be breaking up facets of his "canon" self—a competent leader who wants to find peace in the world and is willing to work with morally ambiguous people because his race was no better—into the dominant trait.
    • The Forsaken and the Blood Elves themselves are open to debate as well. When it comes to the Forsaken, are they just defending themselves from a world that already viewed them as monsters, even before some of their more vile actions, or have they taken their ideas of self-preservation too far and become little better than the Scourge? Meanwhile, with the Blood Elves, do they deserve to be pitied for all the suffering they have endured and should it be believed that they are truly seeking a "cure" for their magical addiction, or have they already gone past the point of no return, and not only will their addiction eventually destroy them, but everyone else as well?
    • Well as of Cataclysm's announcements, anything is up for debate now. Point in case, Night Elves are getting mages and delving into Arcane Magic... which is the thing that they got shitty with the High/Blood Elves over to begin with. This does soundly say that the Night Elves can shut up their preaching about the evils of Arcane Magic though.
  • Arthas (before his Face–Heel Turn): A spoiled, overzealous and vengeful brat who never would have made a good king anyways, or everything a paladin and prince was ever meant to be, or someone who was doing the best he could and wound up breaking down under the pressure? The human campaign takes place in a VERY short period of time. In Warcraft III, Arthas wasn't given more than a few days of rest between the first mission in which he meets the Scourge, the one in which his forces are nearly overrun by undead, and his attempt to nurse his ego and "cleanse" Stratholme. It would seem Ner'zhul thought that if he had the time to retreat and take council with his father, things would have turned out differently. Also, the "let's destroy the beasts!" line from the first mission and the "I should be king" line from clicking on him enough sort of proves that the paladin training hadn't really taken root very deeply - not yet, anyway. The real question would be how Arthas would've reacted if given a chance to grow a bit - or to consider his options.
    • Now with his death the question remains: did he truly die with his humanity restored or was he unrepenant to the end and what he said were intended to show disappointment in his failure and dread of actually dying? Word of God seems to deny that he was redeemed in any way, but given the myriad interpretations of his final words along with some of the quests that relate to his passing (the one with Jaina's locket) it could only be Metzen's interpretation and not an official one, we may never know...
    • During his undead life, was he a Bad Boss or a Benevolent Boss? He's shown to be both, with sending the death knights out on a suicide mission, caring very little for some of his soldier's deaths yet he mourns troops who couldn't keep going on during the third war, Thought of Kel'Thuzad as a friend instead of a servant and declared he wouldn't let his followers get killed by the rebels.
  • Illidan: Was he a hero who was willing to go to extreme lengths to save his friends, family, and the world? Was he an Anti-Hero who still ultimately did the right thing? Was he a Well-Intentioned Extremist who didn't realize his own evil? Or was he just a power-mad loner who did a couple of good deeds to justify it to himself? Notable in that the writing of the games have slowly slid from the first to the last in the way it portrays both his current and past actions over time.
    • A little of both. He's clearly addicted to power and is extremely ruthless, but isn't completely heartless. He did sincerely love Tyrande, and he didn't get into any of the "force her to love me" routine. For the most part, however, his motives to appear to selfish. Legion and its supplementary material, in particular, posit that all of these interpretations are valid to some extent, and In-Universe various other characters lean in one direction or another over him (the split between Kayn and Altruis being the most obvious).
  • Orgrim Doomhammer: A tragic hero who wanted the best for the orcs, even if it meant the destruction of the humans, or a murderous, backstabbing warlord? (It's entirely possible, using the demonic corruption backstory, that it was first one, and then the other.)
    • Orgrim was one of the notable few who didn't drink from the chalice which turned most of the orcs into demon-like brutes. He's also the Player Character. Humans Are Bastards or Humans Are Special.
    • One of the reasons Orgrim is up to so may interpretations is the number of retcons relating to him; originally he decieved and ambushed Lothar (greatest human hero ever); later this was retconned into killing him in an honorable, on on one fight — something a lot of people didn't like. Also, he was known among the orcs as "The Backstabber" for usurping the position of Warchief from Blackhand. A lot of people took this to mean he stabbed Blackhand in the back in a cowardly assassination attempt; it was never clearly stated in the original lore and was someone in line with his behavior, like ambushing Lothar. It was later explained that he killed Blackhand in a fair fight— he was called the backstabber because Blackhand was popular. From there, Orgrim was mainly doing what was best for the orcs even if it meant wiping out the humans.
  • Daelin Proudmoore: A prejudiced, violent psychopath who couldn't let go of the past, a noble but tragically short-sighted hero who couldn't let go of the past, or a hero who was betrayed by his own daughter?
  • Jaina Proudmoore: A philanthropist who is trying to avert pointless tragedies, or a traitor and appeaser who refuses to see the big picture? Her actions willfully condemned her own father to death and later denied the Alliance a golden opportunity to decapitate the Horde's leadership: was she saving lives or ensuring a longer, bloodier war later on?
    • And that's not even getting into the theories that her support of Thrall (and thereby the Horde) may have a deeper motive.
    • Or she's just plain evil. Two of her boyfriends and arguably her father have gone insane, she manipulated Thrall into bumping off Daddy, and everything which happens seems to consolidate her powerbase. Now in Cataclysm, Alliance forces (presumably under her command) have invaded the Barrens.
  • Sylvanas Windrunner: has she, as an undead horror, retained any of her former heroism and nobility, or is she a twisted, irrevocably corrupted mockery of everything she was in life? Interestingly enough, this particular one is occasionally discussed in-game, especially among the Blood Elves in Quel'thalas to whom Sylvanas has offered her protection and sponsorship. There are more than enough hints of both a genuine sadness and a merciless, ruthless streak, as revealed in various events that emphasize either her bitterness or her melancholy, though currently she seems slightly closer towards good than evil. (The RPG books listed Sylvanas as Lawful Evil, but they're a bit out of date in the timeline, and Blizzard seems to love teasing players with this one.)
    • The Lament of the Highborne and The Lady's Necklace quests seem to support the genuine sadness part. However, after you finish the quest, she yells at the player character who was thinking she was weak and holding on to the past. Maybe she's just kidding herself?
    • She also becomes increasingly ruthless in Cataclysm, raising undead for the Horde and using the same New Plague that was used at the Wrathgate. One interpretation is that having accomplished her goal of revenge against the Lich King, she has lost sight of all other goals she once had. Another is that the incident and the Horde bailing her out solidified her loyalty to the Horde and that she's trying to help them against the Alliance while refusing to accept that they don't like the assistance that they're getting.
    • She also essentially blackmails the Blood Elves into joining the Horde's war against the Scourge by threatening to cut off all Horde support (Forsaken included) in their lands in Lor'themar's short story, In The Shadow Of The Sun, implying she doesn't care much for her old people either.
    • Furthermore, even later novels set during the third war show that her We Have Reserves strategy extends to when she was still alive.
  • Rexxar: noble defender of a threatened people, uncaring wildman, or bloodthirsty tool of Thrall's tyranny?
  • King Varian Wrynn: A proud and noble ruler who stands up for what he believes in and refuses to let anything harm the Alliance ever again or a hotheaded, barbaric racist looking for an excuse to declare war out of revenge for what happened to him? Or is he just human, a person who tries to be a good king and father, but is held back by his Lo'Gosh persona and personal failings?
  • Garrosh Hellscream: violent and insane berserker who wants power at any cost (usually goes with Messiah!Thrall) or the only one who can run the Horde efficiently (usually goes with Naive!Thrall)?
    • The short story "Heart Of War" asks us to make another decision on Garrosh; Is he an honorable person who is trying to protect his people from the Alliance's aggression in the only place they can call home, or is he too afflicted with Moral Myopia and unfamiliar with the past conflicts to think that people have reason to hate the Horde, and whose "standards" are a way of seeming better than his enemies?
    • During the final mak'gora with Thrall, which ends in Garrosh's death, Garrosh accuses Thrall of leaving him the responsibility of running the Horde, even though Garrosh wasn't ready for it. Does Garrosh have a point, meaning that Thrall was partly responsible for his misdeeds, or is he blaming others for his own mistakes? Furthermore, consider that the last time Thrall and Garrosh met, Garrosh arrogantly dismissed Thrall as no longer a true orc, and accused him of weakening the Horde even as Garrosh's allies turned against him. Did Garrosh come to regret his actions, or does he still think that he's a better Warchief than Thrall?
  • Grom Hellscream: father of the above character, subject of similar interpretations, even in-universe. Revered as a hero of the Horde by Thrall for his Redemption Equals Death Heroic Sacrifice, most members of the Alliance would rather remember what he did during the previous wars. Mercilessly mowing down people with his giant axe, that's what he did. Including an elven demigod, after he was supposedly redeemed the first time and corrupted again.
    • Notably, some members of the Horde, such as Cairne and Varok, are grateful for what he did for the Orcs, but also acknowledge his misdeeds.
  • Kael'Thas Sunstrider: Well-Intentioned Extremist trying vainly to save his slaughtered kin and their addiction to magic... or fallen power mad Prince in service of those that slaughtered his people? There's a lot of Lore Rage about Kael... and Illidan...
  • Tyrande Whisperwind: Noble and respected leader of the Sentinels during the Long Vigil who did what she had to do to defend her people or disobedient, racist, and unfaithful woman who justifies the manipulation of the men who love her and unleashes a great evil on Azeroth with her goddess?
    • Malfurion notes upon emerging from the Emerald Dream and seeing her for the first time in 1,000 years that she's different than he remembers, and she notes that it's because she has been fighting for her people all this time. It's possible that she started out as a kind person, then became colder as a result of fighting alone against many enemies for a millennium, but after being reunited with her beloved Malfurion, learning the value of cooperation in the battle on Mount Hyjal (she tells Jaina, "Your plan is a bold one, girl. Perhaps I have misjudged you outlanders") and joining the Alliance, opened up to others again.
  • Malfurion himself: Is he a wise and noble leader who recognizes the pointlessness of Alliance/Horde conflict, or a useless hypocrite who refuses to stand up to the Horde when they attack the Night Elves?
  • Murlocs: Demon fish-people who slaughter other races for fun and profit, or noble souls forced from their deep-sea homes and trying to survive a world of hate?
  • In Cataclysm, Donna, a young girl in Stormwind who had previously been chasing William to get her doll back, steals William's Grindgear Gorilla and runs off with it. Is this meant to teach William a lesson, or does it show that she is, deep down, as much of a jerk as he is?
    • Obviously this is a very deep statement by Blizzard on the nature of the PvP system. One side attacks the other, then the attacked side responds in kind. Then everyone respawns and we do it all again, day-in day-out. No one ever "wins the war" and no one is ever on top for very long. It's an odd statement for Blizzard to make, given that they're the ones who set up the faction system in such a way that conflict is the only way the two sides are capable of interacting.
    • Or maybe we're overthinking it.
  • Another Cataclysm example: Trade Prince Gallywix: Callous Jerkass who represents traditional Goblin Values and is the best representation of a leader for their race? Or a callous Jerkass who have done so many horrible things that he is hated by everyone for good reason and is unfit to lead the goblins?
  • The Twilight's Hammer Cult: opportunists in search of power? People driven to what they believe is the only path available by the dark times? Victims of Old God brainwashing?
  • Emperor Lei Shen? A tyrannical, fascist, Social Darwinist and Knight Templar that only sought absolute power to enslave those he deemed inferior under the delusion of doing the "work" of the Titans? An Well-Intentioned Extremist who had to commit these actions to survive and rid the Mogu of th curse of flesh? Or a visionary who brought order to Pandaria after disunity and protected it from the Mantid despite the high loss of life? Or all three? Or just a pawn of the Zandalari in their attempt to resurrect their empire?
  • At the end of "Dark Heart of Pandaria," Grizzle Gearslip and his goblin workers have finished their mission, with many casualties, and Malkorok gives Grizzle only a fraction of the promised payment. Grizzle protests, but Malkorok says "the Warchief does not compensate the dead", and they should see an honorable death as its own reward before launching into a "The Reason You Suck" Speech against Grizzle's greed. Is Grizzle trying to get Malkorok to abide by the original terms of the contract (albeit for not completely noble reasons), only to get cheated out of his payment due to Malkorok and Garrosh's racism against goblins who died doing a dangerous job for the Horde? Or is Malkorok simply acting out of a principle of loyalty and honor (albeit which compel him to do terrible things at times), and rightly calling Grizzle out on his trying to make money off of his dead workers?
    • In the Tol Dagor instance of Battle for Azeroth, Korgus, overseer of the prison, risks Lady Ashvane's wrath by refusing to flood the lower levels to deal with the rioting prisoners. Is this because of (possibly misplaced) faith in his men's ability to do their jobs, or does he find this act so reprehensible that he'd rather risk being killed for his failure than stoop that low?
• The World Ends with You (or It's A Wonderful World) has many of the characters being easily able to be Alternatively Characterized, and in fact has an extra chapter where it does just that, expanding on many of the traits already visible in the main story.
  • Joshua's ambiguously gayness, having the ambiguous part taken out. This can even be further alternatively characterized as him simply messing with Neku, and in fact being straight.
    • In the end, was Joshua a Smug Snake, Magnificent Bastard who enjoyed forcing people to play games and in fact knew he wouldn't destroy Shibuya from the first day, or was he inspired by Neku's refusal to shoot him?
  • Shiki is either cheerful and positive because she's pretending to be more like Eri, or because that's how she is, but she's too shy and unconfident to show it.
  • Neku either genuinely hates people, or can't bear to be close to them, afraid he'll get hurt (the second seems more likely, though, given what his exposition about his old friend as he climbs up Pork City reveals). He could also be afraid that he'll hurt them, indirectly.
    • Does Neku have a romantic interest in Shiki, or is it simply the first person he's opened up to that she becomes his fee for the second week? It's implied that Kitaniji made her Neku's "entry fee" to cover up the fact that without the Composer, he couldn't bring anyone back to life, which would mean Shiki doesn't necessarily have to be most important to Neku, but Neku never doubts that she's that important to him after hearing the news.
  • Is Beat so stupid he doesn't notice what's going on, or is he so driven by his goals he doesn't notice?
  • Kariya is either too lazy to get promoted, or he enjoys Uzuki's company so much he doesn't want to leave their partnership.
    • Or he's perfectly aware of how corrupt the higher-ups are and has no intention of joining them.
  • Another Day does a number on Rhyme. Is she a genuinely pure, wise little girl, or is that just a façade to obscure her cruel, manipulative nature?
• The Walking Dead has this on a wider scale than most games due to the fact that, while most characters core traits remain, the way they treat you is often determined by your choices.
  • In Season One, Kenny can be either a loyal friend of Lee's who goes through things no man should have to experience but still supports Lee to the end, or a redneck asshole who gets angry at Lee for weeks because Lee wouldn't help him murder a pensioner or for other stupid reasons, and unable to take any criticism. This continues in Season Two, where he's either a determined leader who still suffers much more than others and occasionally vents his anger on people who don't deserve but is overall the most helpful member of your group, or a self-centered man who once again cannot take criticism, fails to see the error in his ways, constantly looks for someone to take his anger out on, and ultimately tries to murder the only other survivor left in your group. Regardless of what choices you made, it can't be denied that Kenny Can't Take Criticism, but also cares about more people than most others in your group.
  • Depending on a single choice, The Stranger can be either the Hero of Another Story who lost everything because Lee took everything he had left, has suffered just as much as anyone else, and had no bad intentions until you showed up, or he can be a lunatic who lost everything because of his own stupidity, chose to blame it on Lee despite Lee having nothing to do with it, talks to a decapitated zombie head, and thinks he can raise a child better than Lee despite all his problems starting off when he lost his own child.
  • Jane in Season Two. Is she an unreliable ally who only sticks around if she feels it's necessary, cares only about herself and puts AJ's life in danger while at the same time Indirectly but intentionally killing Kenny, or is she a friend who simply doesn't know how to handle being in a group, but still helpful, pragmatic and willing to make the tough decisions?
  • Bonnie is an odd one, and a Heel–Face Revolving Door to boot. She's either a lackey of the Arc Villain who tries to convince Clem that it's not so bad being a prisoner, but eventually gets cold feet and helps you escape - only to soon turn out to be fairly useless without someone to tell her what to do, unable to take responsibility if she gets Luke killed, and eventually gets cold feet again and tries to make off with all your remaining supplies, or she's an innocent young woman who's somewhat oblivious to the world she lives in, leading her to change sides, but again unable to take the strain the world puts on her.
  • Arvo — Either a crippled young man who gets robbed, loses his entire group when they try to get revenge, becomes a prisoner, harshly beaten by Kenny, and may have died off-screen in Season 2 Episode 5, or a survivor who helped turn a gang of Russian thugs against you over a little mistreatment, disrespected the only people in your group who were nice to him, came close to getting himself killed a few times, and was last seen holding the gun that shot none other than you no matter how nice you tried to be to him.
  • Lee and Clementine, as the player characters, are completely decided by your choices. They can be moral, pragmatic, kind, self-centered, assholes, or simply mute.
• Common in anything made by Zap Dramatic, chief among them the player character(s). Since none of them are really defined, some people just like to pretend its the same guy every time.
  • A popular interpretation of Helen from Ambition is that she is the only sane woman in a world full of pretentious idiots. Her actions in "The Tryst" are interpreted as the result of years of putting up with this taking a toll on her psyche.
• Warframe has many, many examples due to leaving several plot points vague so that it can expand on them in later quests and events.
  • The Lotus has many examples - is she truly a loyal mother figure to the Tenno, or was she brainwahsed by the Orokin to fulfil this role to make hte Tenno more pliable. Did she willingly return to the Sentients or was that also a result of brainwashing.
  • The Red Veil can either be seen as Well Intentioned Extremists fighting The Empire and the corrupt MegaCorp that rule the system or a Cult no better than its enemies. "Chains of Harrow" implies that their more negative aspects are the result of the influence of the Man in the Wall.
  • The Perrin Sequence wanting to share their wealth with the system could be seen as being genuine charity or simply Pragmatic Villainy, as their peaceful way of seraching for profit would entice more followers and avoid the wrath of the Tenno. "The Glast Gambit" indicates that their leader, at least, genuinely believes that charity is something that should be done for its own sake, but it never specifies whether this is the majority view of his associates.
  • New Loka may want to restore Earth and humanity to a pristine state, but due to the sheer amount of genetic divergence among humans in the Warframe universe, their obsession with the pure human form makes them come off as A Nazi by Any Other Name.
  • The Tenno themselves, due to their nature as Heroic Mimes and an overall lack of story, initially came off as this, with it being ambiguous if the Tenno were fighting the various powers of the system because We Help the Helpless or because they were Punch Clock Heroes. The introduction of the Syndicates put a wrench in this idea, though, and the appearance of Soalris United ultimately did away with this entirely, cementing that the Tenno really do help others for the sake of helping others.

X

• Wilhelm from Xenosaga get a fair bit of alternate interpretations. Is he a Well-Intentioned Extremist who is underestimating humanity or a somewhat cold man who is nonetheless working for the greater good? Depends largely on if you believe Eternal Recurance was a means or an end. It could be both, considering his main goal was to prevent the collapse of the lower domain (our universe). And when the alternatives are our universe getting destroyed and the upper one staying around or BOTH getting destroyed. Considering both ways end up with the lower domain still around either by resetting everything or the collective unconscious evolving enough to prevent or reverse the dispersion that would have lead to said destruction. And since doing something like THAT is by no means easy, he really skirts the line between Well-Intentioned Extremist and Necessarily Evil.
  • Wilhelm may have been trying to become God (or really was him, thus making it a case of God Is Evil) himself. Not only does he have some subtle A God Am I like moments, he also can make people immortal, see the consciousness of anyone he likes, and is able to keep the time-loop he had going. Also, he can do whatever he wants, whether it's transporting gigantic robots with the snap of a finger or force choking someone. He also acts more like God than what the official explanation is. He claims U-DO is God and that the two Abels are it's observation vessels, but knowing Wilhelm, it wouldn't surprise me to find out that he had something to do with that too. This is the guy who was behind the U.M.N. Another thing is that we never really saw what happened to him and Kevin. It's assumed that he dies along with Kevin, but they never show them actually disappearing (like they did with Caanan and Voyager) nor do they mention it after the last boss fight. This leaves me to believe he just went to a different dimension (most likely the Upper one) during the Zarathustra battle. I mean, I find it hard to believe that he'd give a Testament the power to kill him, let alone create just one key to activate Zarathustra. He probably just went elsewhere to plan. Not that we'd ever find out anyway, thanks to the series being canceled.

Y

• Thanks to the game's intentionally vague plot and the ambiguous nature of its setting, Yume Nikki is subject to a lot of this. Because there is essentially no dialogue, speculation about the player character and the other figures seen in her dreams can run wild. Popular interpretations range from the likely idea that Madotsuki is a hikikomori who lives almost solely in her dreams, through to bizarre and apocalyptic scenarios where she is trapped in her apartment by an Eldritch abomination. The latter would be easy to dismiss as Wild Mass Guessing, if it weren't for the fact that a similar scenario is canon for the game's manga adaptation. Even her age is difficult to know for certain, because of the game's 8-bit graphics.

---