We can get all stickly and start discussing hero motivation (which leans to the “public” aspect – are heroes doing good for the sake of good, or for the sake of looking good?

The split between SP and MMO is so clear here. There is no heroism in MMO, only grind exceptionalism. in MLB 2K9 I can make myself a great pitcher, lead the league in strike outs, and take my team to the World Series – all with the click of the button (and of course, the underlying skill). In MMO, I can create a guy who will die to 2 or more rats at the same time, but hey, keep trucking little man! Practice! Some day you can slay a 40 ft dragon solo!

MMO is “deferred success”, which is the new term in the puplic education system instead of “failing”. Not doable in current MMO land, but perhaps someone is working on it. =)

I think there is a point to both sides of the argument, I don’t think either of you are completely right so you’re both wrong.

The definitions of hero you used are a bit difficult to extract meaning from, especially as the second is entirely circular (a hero is one who does heroic things or has heroic qualities – and presumably heroic things are what a hero does, while heroic qualities are what a hero has).

But let’s look at classical examples of heroism, shall we? Beowulf is one of the oldest and is a suitable place to begin. Beowulf fought Grendel in the meadhall Heorot, slaying the monster while Beowulf’s men surrounded it. Though Beowulf’s men tried to help, the monster was impervious to their weapons, and wouldn’t fall until Beowulf ripped its arm out. This was heroic, most would agree. Later, Beowulf and his men went to the cave where Grendel’s mother lived, and Beowulf was dragged to the bottom of an icy lake to fight the monster alone. Was Beowulf heroic when he fought Grendel’s mother (Angelina Jolie references aside of course)? One might argue that he was heroic, even though he was alone at the time… but then he was working on behalf of others, risking his life for their welfare. Well, so too are most PCs when we solo bandit chieftains, liches, and what-have-you; we mostly pursue these tasks as part of a quest that we’re given on behalf of NPCs who, the fiction would have us believe, require our help.

Perseus wished to attend the betrothal of his mother, Danae, in return for which the scheming king Polydectes demanded that Perseus bring him the head of the Gorgon Medusa. Perseus braved many dangers and acquired three divine instruments in the course of his quest, which culminated in his *solo* defeat of the only mortal Gorgon. Was Perseus less than heroic because nobody was there with him? Was he less heroic because he killed the monster for a fairly trivial reason (Polydectes was hoping Perseus would die in the attempt) and not because, say, the life of everyone on the island was at stake?

Was Heracles heroic or not when he slew the Nemean lion? When he slew the Lernaen hydra?

As the above examples indicate, we often consider “heroic” those efforts which overcome extreme challenges, often at the risk of one’s own life. Heroism, classically speaking and in common parlance, has absolutely nothing to do with the presence of other people at the time. It is perfectly possible and even common for people to be heroic by themselves; what counts is the extremity of the challenge and generally of the risk involved. The risk to one’s virtual life is no less when solo; arguably it’s greater since nobody else is there to res you.

Are actions only heroic if someone writes about or otherwise witnesses them? Are heroes lost to time (say, quiet heroes who saved lives in war or the like, with nobody left to speak of their actions) still heroes?

Is the guy who conquers his supremely challenging smoking habit a hero for his own health?

Does magnitude of potentially heroic actions matter? Say, a guy in the park who saves a child’s afternoon by subtly angling his path so the child doesn’t drop their ice cream? Or would he have to scramble and dive to save the child from a runaway car? What about just yelling at a rabid dog until it runs off? What if the child, the guy, and the dog are the only ones there, and the child is just afraid of the guy yelling, and winds up running home in tears, afraid of strange guys *and* big loud dogs? The mother, knowing what *really* happened, might consider him a hero, but if she only hears the child’s story, she might think quite otherwise.

Ultimately, I’m just not comfortable using the term “hero” as something purely defined by the opinion of others. It’s way to relative to be useful if that’s the case. Not to get too blunt about it, but certain political figures can be hailed as a hero by some, and a villain by others. With a description that vague and malleable, it loses all objective meaning.

As such, maybe there really is no objectivity about what constitutes “heroism”… and arguing about definitions really is pointless.

Heroic? Nobody said anything as I wooted!!

Basically the way I see heroism is defeating the odds thrown against us, or my own person as well, and overcoming those odds. But, I do not need others to recognize that.

Think of real life heroes. Do you think Martin Luther King wanted to die? Yet he is thought of as a hero due to his actions, and he did not need others to believe he was hero due to something specific,,,he did not even want the title.

He did a pretty good job solo!

I guess this is why I feel AoC (and also Guild Wars) makes me feel “heroic” when I play…against so many odds, I have that chance to survive. I do not need the recognition of others, even if they are more enticing..
Overall, somehow these games show me in that limelight, whether through the Fatality or a Cut Scene.

I feel heroic whether someone is there or not.

But, like you said…this is how I feel.

I also wanted to work in a tangential comment about self-improvement in real life, and how relying on others to define your self-worth is dangerous, but I got distracted. Also, that’s perhaps a philosophical tangent too far; do we really want to be heroes in real life, or just modestly and honestly go about doing good, whether or not it’s recognized as heroism?

Chalk one up for power fantasies, perhaps, but there’s definitely something to be said for how shallow they ultimately tend to be.

If, by definition, heroic deeds require the recognition of others, then perhaps the deed itself may not be “heroic” if soloed, at least not in the moment. More than once, however, I’ve seen people on forums lauded for soloing dungeons designed for parties. Depending on the circumstances, that may be trivial or significant, but even there, to a large degree, it’s defined by the community, which would seem to at least intersect with heroism.

Does it count as heroism if it’s determined to be so after the fact?

Perhaps the terminology is getting in the way. Heroism and success aren’t the same thing, after all. One may feel powerful (or successful by the skin of one’s teeth) simply for overcoming a personal challenge. They need not have another confirm their success. (That’s the core of a solo playstyle, not conicidentally; self-defined success without regard for the definition of others.) Similarly, heroism need not be successful; many are the stories where one is considered heroic precisely because they sacrificed themselves for others.

When most game design is more about success (killing stuff while not being killed), and true heroism (working for others, even if it requires a sacrifice) isn’t often a metric for in-game success, is it any surprise that games that try to frame the player as a Hero are confusing the issue?