Why an Avatar Needs Character When Functionality Exists
 
What's needed is character. A persona. Or better yet—a collection of personas. So you could pick and choose, mix and match as needed. And the second thing: functionality is no longer the main event
Well, I used to make custom avatars. Good ones, premium, "fully loaded." They'd gesture, the lip-sync was flawless, the text—exactly what the client provided—everything looked posh and expensive, cooler than hard-boiled eggs.

The background matched the vulgar worldview of that era.
You know the ones I mean: offices, restaurants, seaside-palm trees, girls-cars. Beaming faces, friendly smiles, and all that other nonsense screaming "buy me now!"

Technically, everything was correct. The viewer got the point, nodded... Whether they bought or not is another question. But they forgot it all within an hour. Because functionality works, but it doesn't stick.

It occurred to me: I had to make the viewer remember not the text, not the brand, not the product, but the one who's talking about it. So that a month later, upon hearing the word "character" or seeing the product's name, what pops into their head isn't an abstraction, but a specific face, a figure, a gesture, an intonation associated with that brand or product.

That's when I realized what was needed—character. A persona. Or better yet—a collection of personas. So you could pick and choose, mix and match as needed. And the second thing I realized: functionality was no longer the main event.

But it doesn't disappear; it keeps working. It just needs to be shown, so the viewer sees it live and understands that this—can be repeated.

That's how the idea was born—the necessity of creating repeatable gestures for the Persona. The character.

Well, the rest was simple—dream up distinctive personas in different styles and poses, and figure out which gestures would match the characters and their style-poses... So, a couple of weeks of meditating in various neural networks, and the first character, with nine repeatable gestures, was ready.


This is Ira. And you can see her nine gestures right here.
After that, things got more interesting. To understand why my characters are the way they are, you can get an idea by reading my other articles (for example, here and here). Frankly, the only answer is: I explained it as best I could. You read it, and maybe later, you can explain it to me.
A Functional Avatar is a Voice Without a Name
Imagine you need to whip up a tutorial video. You take a standard AI avatar, feed it the text, and it speaks it clearly, with pauses, with gestures. Technically flawless.

But if you ask a viewer a week later to describe the avatar, they'll say: "Some... talking person. Or a robot. Don't remember." Ask them to recall the details from the tutorial, the result might be different, or it might be the same.

I've studied a lot of tutorials myself. Ask me what I remember from them? Zero. So, it turns out the point of the education was for the course creator or video producer to make money from selling it or to save money by using an avatar? I don't like that: if you're teaching someone, taking their money, feeding them a line, and in the end, only you benefit—that's a scam.

Being a teacher isn't just a profession; it's a calling PLUS a profession.


That's why a functional avatar, much like a half-baked teacher, is like a voice from an answering machine: you heard it, you understood, you forgot.


It's not bad—it's just not memorable. It doesn't need to be memorable; its job is to deliver information. And it does that. Task completed, contract fulfilled, curtain call. Got a problem with the buttons on the suit? Sure. Head to the button department. And there they tell you: the threads are to blame, and we don't handle threads, go to the thread department…

Now imagine: the same task—teaching—is performed by Ira. She delivers the same text, but with irony and a bit of teasing, or a slightly awkward, angular flirtation.

The viewer gets the same information but remembers that it was delivered by a cheeky bitch where you "don't remember exactly how she spoke or what she did, but it was cool." Meaning, a week later, they'll remember Ira—her gestures, her posture, her intonation. They'll remember their attitude towards her, and through that, the subject of the video becomes associated. And they'll want to see her again.

Character PLUS functionality creates an attitude. Attitude determines being*, which determines consciousness.

*In some cases you might be familiar with, attitude determines not 'being' [бытие], but 'a beating' [битие], but remember: one beaten man is worth two unbeaten ones.
Character is Not a Decoration, But a Core
An avatar that's just "cute" or "cool" is nonsense. Is Shrek from the cartoon cool or cute? It depends—in different scenes, based on the will of the author, screenwriter, and director. But their will doesn't extend to what is inherent to Shrek. He is an orc. A giant. A monster. An ogre. That is his essence. This is what forms his character. This is his core.

Character is not what is said by the persona. It's not a decoration or an emphasis of the text. It is the way the text exists—in the mouth, the facial expressions, and the gestures of the actor—the avatar.

Character determines not only what is said but also how the viewer perceives it. A functional avatar conveys information. A persona with character generates an attitude towards the information it conveys. And the viewer remembers not the facts, but the feeling, their own attitude towards them.
Shiva says the same phrase, but with different gestures
Shiva says the same phrase with the same gesture, but with different intonations
The same phrase, but with different emotions and different gestures, is spoken by Nihonsan
!
Do you see the difference?
Do you understand now what a character is?
Character Makes Mistakes Interesting
You might think this part of the article is just my excuse in case I messed up creating a video with my character for you. Think about it. Have you thought about it? Good. Now get that nonsense out of your head and just keep reading.

A functional avatar must work perfectly. Any glitch is a bug. A gesture in the wrong place, a pause that's off, an intonation that's not quite right—all of this breaks the functionality because the task is to deliver information cleanly.

A character with personality can make a mistake, and it will look organic. Shiva with her four arms makes an unplanned movement—and it doesn't look like a bug, but like a spontaneous improvisation of a mystical dance. Because Shiva isn't a function; she is a character, and her movements exist not within the framework of "right/wrong," but within the framework of "this is Shiva."

Character creates the space for the "manifestation of something from something," if we can call that very "attitude" that. Functionality creates the frame for a photograph.

So, how do you like my excuse? I like it too.
Character Answers the Question "Why Watch?"
A functional avatar answers the question "what?" What is it saying? It's teaching. What is it doing? It's explaining. The viewer gets the information and leaves.

A character with personality answers the question "why?" Why watch Zhongguo with her fan? Because it's interesting to observe and anticipate something unusual, even if it's minimal. Why watch Asdis with his guitar? Because every one of his gestures is a performance, and there's an anticipation—will his strum hit the right sounding note?

A functional avatar is an answer to a task. A character with personality is a reason to stay longer. You can read the information in an article. But the character—you can only see them.
Let's say there are two videos with identical text about AI technologies. The first one uses a functional avatar. The second one features Zahra with her laptop, sarcastically commenting on every mistake beginners make, as if it were a personal insult to her. Which video will be watched to the end? The one with just information, or the one with information plus Zahra?

Character transforms content not into a "show," but into interest. And interest is more interesting precisely because it's yours, dear viewer!

To be memorable, to engage, to spark interest, to hold attention, to create a connection—functionality alone is not enough. Because it doesn't create a relationship. It completes the task and leaves.

The question is, what does your project need: to complete a task or to create a connection? If it's the first—functionality is enough. If it's the second—you can't do without character.

Then again, this is all, of course, my personal musings. So you don't feel like you've read this for nothing, I'll take my leave with these words: do what seems right to you, and may unearthly grace be with you. Amen.
Choose an Avatar from the collection
Made on
Tilda