108 réponses à ce sujet

[Selenora]

happy_daiz wrote...

I typically play a good character; for me, it's a conscience thing (not a conscious thing). I feel awful doing mean things to people (yes, I know, they're not real) but I agonize over my good decisions, so the bad ones? Yeah, I'd just rather not go there. I will say that I gave in and murder knifed Anders in my third playthrough to see what would happen, but I felt horrible about it.

@Snowship: I prefer the Templar ending, but mostly because I think Cullen is dreamy.  <3
 

I did the templar ending only coz of him

[phyreblade74]

It took me absolutely forever to figure out how to really RP an evil character. Evil for evil's sake, I mean, just didn't make sense to me. I needed to wrap my head around the meaning of evil, what makes a person evil, and how people might be or become evil, long before I could take my first steps into playing such a character. My evil characters, btw, are generally self-serving, abused by life and the world around them to such an extent they literally don't care about anything or anyone so much as it might benefit themselves somehow. And even then they usually end up meeting or following along with someone who shifts or changes their worldview to such an extent it becomes mighty difficult to label them evil anymore, lol.

That's been my experience with RPG in general, mind you, not just Dragon Age. My characters are generally brash and outspoken, prone to lawful behavior and choices, determined in their friendships, almost to a fault, in fact, and honest to a tee. My husband says that's me, set in some fantasy world. There's an argument to be had, I suppose, that RPG should be about doing those things we wouldn't do in RL, yes. But I think it's foolish, too, to think we don't invest in our RP characters those qualities we most admire in ourselves and those around us. I change even my evil characters, until they begin to veer towards good. As I see it, it's because I'm not really going to enjoy playing a flat, one-dimensional character. And I'll always make in my characters those things I most want to see in myself, shrug.

[Crow_22]

I play both sides of the coin. It's interesting to me to see how evil, or how good a person can be. I love treading both lines during games like this because good and evil blurs so easily that it's impossible to tell who is good, and who is evil. Like Garrus said in ME2, it's hard seeing in black and white, because there is always going to be that grey spot.

All in all, I prefer 'good' characters. It tears at me at times when I see someone suffer.... Unless they deserve it.

[Esk7140]

It doesn't feel 'right' to play an evil character. Luckily in DA2 going on an aggressive path isn't necessarly evil. You don't slaughter innocent people etc, simply your character is more straight-forward, which is quite nice

I had 2 playthroughs, first as a mage (and obviously siding with mages), second time as a rogue, siding with templars. Even so, I couldn't kill Anders when Meredith left the decision to me. Initially I selected the option, saw the cutscene... and it felt so wrong ) after all he had been my companion for so long. So I loaded the game and let him go!

[AshleyS3]

Gotholhorakh wrote...

Ha, lots of us don't get the opportunity to live noble lives, or glorious lives, or make great sacrifices to save others, because we're too busy with our heads down in cubicles, ticking off the days 'til we die.

When life is a progress bar of doom, an hour spent being a hero is pretty nice  .

Very true. I think the reason I like games like this so much is because I can play the hero which I have little opportunity to do in reality. Playing as a villain doesn't give me the same satisfaction.

[_Aine_]

I don't know, I have trouble being 100% good or bad in games, let alone real life. I like playing a flawed hero, because face it, the best actions in RL usually amount to nothing more than positive-self-feelings than it does becoming heroic... epic happens fairly infrequently in RL after all. Even 100% bad is just too flat and easy for me to find satisfying. Maybe someone driven to desperate ends, or a good person who does bad things for the best of reasons. Any idiot character I ever make ends up with some semblance of a moral compass, regardless of her/his methods.

My characters rarely are *good* or *bad*. They stick with their own truths, which may or may not conform to societies niceties and good graces. The key to playing someone who is either BAD or makes some "aggressive" or "renegade" sorts of decisions, is to have the characters mindset in place as something external to YOU before you even get into it. I find the "me" gets in the way if I don't.

That said, my aggressive, snarky male mage is the most fun I have had in a long time. There is a limit to his madness, which is how I successfully do it without feeling like a douche, the character feels at least he is doing the right thing, despite what the world may think (a la Loghain).   Actually, that character may be the most like how I may be at my best/worst, before I censor myself to become proper for society.  Snarky, funny, aggressive and slightly impatient.  lol  Given that I am female, not a mage and fairly diplomatic [most of the time], perhaps games are really freaking cheap therapy.   

Modifié par shantisands, 26 avril 2011 - 08:27 .

[Seena]

szekeres2010 wrote...

I just can't bring myself to do nasty things that I would not do in real life. For me RPG is about playing the character how I feel is right to me. Ocasionaly I try the "dark side" choices but it never feels right to me.

Same here. I don't steal, kill without provocation etc.

[AtreiyaN7]

Because I'm such a straight arrow that I can't bring myself to be evil. Oh, I'll sacrifice people's lives and make difficult choices for the greater good (mostly), but being a blood mage and ripping people apart with demons, etc. is really not my thing.

[infernalserpent]

Crow_22 wrote...

I play both sides of the coin. It's interesting to me to see how evil, or how good a person can be. I love treading both lines during games like this because good and evil blurs so easily that it's impossible to tell who is good, and who is evil. Like Garrus said in ME2, it's hard seeing in black and white, because there is always going to be that grey spot.

I'm much the same way, but I do it as meta-gaming: I want to see what's in the game! My first play-through of an RPG will probably be pure sunshine and puppies to see that content, and then I push dark-and-horrible to the limit to see the other side (or one of the other sides, if there's more than one). I have a limited amount of free time, so I figure I'd better maximize my ROI by hitting both extremes and then as much of the middle as I can.

And, let me tell you, playing a chaotic-evil blood mage in DA2, sowing maximum destruction and heartbreak throughout Kirkwall, was a hoot. Very cathartic, at a time when I needed it because of RL. I cackled a lot.

Modifié par infernalserpent, 26 avril 2011 - 10:38 .

[whykikyouwhy]

Friends of mine tease me for being "lawful good" and for only being able to play lawful good when at ye olde gaming table (and really, I have a lot of dark, dark thoughts, so the good is just a shiny veener). With DAO and DAII though, I leaned more to capriciousness - making deals that seemed shady, helping people that may not have had the best intentions, inadvertantly letting a demon loose upon the world...that sort of thing. The shades of gray were abundant, and the choices never clear cut as right or wrong. Ultimately, I think my Warden and my Hawke were looking toward the greater good, but some compromises were made on the way there. I was definitely more chaotic good than lawful, to use the old alignment scale, but it felt comfortable for the environment.

[Apathy1989]

I play RPGs for the situations I don't get into in real life. I end up playing as I would in those situations, so usually end up being mix of peaceful/sarcastic on DA2. Only situation I think I chose violent option was when leandra was taken.

I will later play different options, but usually feels weird. Thankfully the violent option in DA2 isn't psychotic or ass like Mass Effect was.

[Laurelinde]

Like others have said, I don't enjoy being nasty or evil. I'm playing games to have fun, not make myself suffer or feel bad! (Like I need any more guilt trips...oy.)

For me, the catharsis/rp value comes in being much, much better than I can in real life, either because I lack the physical strength (e.g. if an Arishok appeared in my town centre demanding a duel to the death, I am in no state to fight him) or the moral conviction (would I sacrifice everything for The Greater Good? I don't know.) In real life, there is always compromise, always mistakes, always things we regret, always failings, even if we try to do the right thing and be good people.

I would say most people are true or lawful neutral for the most part, it's just that our decisions don't generally affect the fate of the world or anything. Who knows how I'd act if I actually, y'know, mattered.

[Sumerisle]

Gamer Ftw wrote...

to me rpgs are all about doing the things I can't in real life.
So I end up playing assassins,bloodmages and people who do whatever they want.
So why play a nice person when you can be that way anyway?

Assassins and bloodmages can be nice people too (Zebran, Leliana, Jowan, Merril). I think nowadays developers don't do appealing things to the evil side players (because is not politically correct?). Back in KOTOR you could do very nasty things (I still have nightmares for torturing and corrupting the poor Bastila:crying:). In BG you coud build a full party of evil characters (I don't remember that possibility in BG2).  Now In ME and DA the evil choices are a joke, it's all about being reckless and selfish, not the "true evil" that was present in KOTOR.
If you really like to play an evil character, go play pen and paper RPGs, you would have even more freedom to do what you want (steal, extort, kidnap, rape, murder, torture, etc.) not what a very limited computer game would let you.
NOTE: I'm not encouraging people to commit such acts, and I do not approve them at all.

[metalcraze33]

Just because someone isn't lawful good doesn't make them evil.
I play people who commit qeuistionable acts but I don't see the character itself as "evil".
Sumerisle I disagree with everything you said.
Many developers nowadays allow you to commit nasty acts.

[TheBlackBaron]

Depends on the game in question, really. KotOR 1 I was pretty much a straight-arrow Light Sider, while KotOR II I was a lot more snarky and played the Exile more like a Grey Jedi.

These days I mainly play Renegade-esque characters, ranging anywhere from a flawed but still basically good hero all the way out to full-on Byronic heroes.

[Sumerisle]

metalcraze33 wrote...

Just because someone isn't lawful good doesn't make them evil.
I play people who commit qeuistionable acts but I don't see the character itself as "evil".
Sumerisle I disagree with everything you said.
Many developers nowadays allow you to commit nasty acts.

I didn't mentioned alignments. D&D is the only system that has the alignments, and is quite a restrictive rule. Real people doesn't behave that way.
Sorry but I think that I rushed to talk about the difference between not being good and being evil, and I missed the point. 
What I tryied to say was, In DA and ME you can choose between being a good character, a questionable character, and a reckless character. The evil character is no longer an option.

Modifié par Sumerisle, 27 avril 2011 - 02:03 .

[metalcraze33]

but character motives can still be defined by those alignments to describe them.

[Maria Caliban]

Gamer Ftw wrote...

to me rpgs are all about doing the things I can't in real life.
So I end up playing assassins,bloodmages and people who do whatever they want.
So why play a nice person when you can be that way anyway?

Why play a jerk if you can be that way in real life?

You can play a nice assassin or blood mage in DA II. Specialization is totally separated from... everything, personality included.

[TomY90]

there was some research actually done into this I saw on ign website which some university found on games like mass effect rarely the renegade option was picked but in the far east (japan etc) the levels of people picking good over evil was considerably lower.

I think their theory was that in west we have been grown up more around the always doing the right thing and we have became so fixated with it we find it hard to go against what societies expects.

whereas the far east they found they are much more open to stuff (example of this how much more research goes into robots and V.I./A.I technology in Japan than anywhere else) which in western society we tend to have less research and less accepting of such technology

[mesmerizedish]

Science proves that the Japanese are soulless and evil.

[mousestalker]

I'm not comfortable being a jerk for sustained periods of time, either in real life or in a game.

I'd love to play a game that allowed me to play a polite villain.

[DragonRacer]

Gamer Ftw wrote...

to me rpgs are all about doing the things I can't in real life.
So I end up playing assassins,bloodmages and people who do whatever they want.
So why play a nice person when you can be that way anyway?

Because while I can be a nice person in real life... I can't be a hero who runs around with a big sword and fights monsters.

So... that's why. At least, for me it is.

[Sarcastic Tasha]

There was a time I felt guilty even letting my horse die on Oblivion (oh what am I saying I still can't let patchy die) but now I find it difficult to play Origins without busting out the murder knife. Playing a complete psycho on Origins is fun, so many murder knife opportunities. I do feel like the warden needs a reason for being a psycho though, but since the Origin stories are all pretty traumatic for the warden I think she has an excuse to be a bit unhinged. I can't play good on Fable 2, the townspeople are so annoying it leads to killing sprees.

I think I used to struggle to do harsh things in games when I tried to play using my own morality. Now I role play a character (the fact these games are called rpgs obviously didn't clue me in before) I can do what ever so long as it fits in with the characters morality. I'm glad I started playing games with a different morality, I often enjoy playing renegade more than paragon now. Paragon Shep and diplomatic Hawke kind of annoy me.

[bleetman]

Because I'm actually a jerk.

[Shacary]

I alwyas tell myself; this time Im going to play a mean cutthroat toon... and somehow I seem to make identical choices Like in Fable I always end up with the Halo... sometimes I try to force my b/f to play once thru cuz he always picks the hardcore curt and even cruel options... I just cant seem to do it.. someone ought to do a psych paper on why this is for those of us whom fail to be cruel! lol