81 réponses à ce sujet

[bleetman]

syllogi wrote...

I just don't want a villain who is completely off their rocker crazy. Or who seems reasonable and logical until the end, and then becomes inexplicably StupidEvil just in time for the big boss fight.

The best villains are often even more charismatic and interesting than the protagonist of the story.

Yes.

Please, I'm begging you. No more "Aha! I spontaneously become a frothing-at-the-mouth lunatic/monster! We fight now!" nonsense.

[ianvillan]

I want Jon irenicus, I dont mean a copy I want the actual Irenicus himself.

But failing that I want someone who is not insane but actually has a well thoughtout plan and whos motivations are not so clear cut.

[FedericoV]

Irenicus is still the best villain Bioware has made thus far.

I had great hopes for the Reapers after ME1 (I imagined them as some sorts lovecraftian ships from the space). But after discovering their backstory in ME2&3, they are not that interesting.

[EricHVela]

"Keep your friends close and your enemies closer."

For the next Dragon Age (that I still hope doesn't have III attached to it -- go back to the names of episodes schema like fantasy novels do).

Someone tugging at the protagonist's strings without the protagonist knowing, smiling in the protagonist's face and offering a hand of friendship that seems sincere ...

Someone that requires the protagonist to think to realize who the villain is instead of simply being told who it is, to think some more to believe it because it's so mind-blowing and to think even more to defeat the villain because a boss fight simply won't work ...

[bloodmage13]

I would love for the main villain to be a pride demon that found its way into this world. NOT an abomination but a real physical pride demon. I would also love for the Qunari to serve as secondary villains.

[LolaLei]

I'm all for the main antagonist (or at least one of them) being a companion or NPC who you work closely with only to discover much later on in the game that he/she has been planning to screw you over from day one, all the while you never suspected him/her until it's too late.

[Sinuphro]

hero 2 wrote...

One of your companions.

no to the main villian in da3 being a from companions in da2 and dao!!

[GodWood]

Dave of Canada wrote...
Or remove the concept of villain and just make certain groups / people antagonistic towards you based on prior choices (and they're perfectly reasonable people, they just oppose you).

This.

My first reponse was someone pragmatic, ruthless and machiavellian but then I realised that's the sort of character I'd want to side with. Really it's for the best to have the 'villain' determined by the player's choices and morality ala the scenario Dave described.

[Lord Gremlin]

JohnCena94 wrote...

The Player.
I really want to be a Tevinter Blood Mage.

This.
To clarify, I want an option to become the villain. The great thing about Jade Empire was the option for the player to become the main Villain, far more evil/dark person then original villain. Which reminds me - a villain like Loghain is preferable to, say, Archdemon, especially in this case. Simply because you can't out-villain an Archdemon.

[Kaiser Arian XVII]

I'm out of ideas ... but I think a female medieval Hitler takes the role perfectly!

[labargegrrrl]

i don't know if i want a villain, or a nemesis. it's always ever so difficult to decide.

[batlin]

I know BW tried to make an unconventional villain in DA2, but ironically in their attempt they made an even MORE obvious and one-dimensional villain in Meredith. An extremist megalomaniacal tyrant who doesn't notice really obvious flaws in her plan? Seen it.

Saren, Malak, "Death's Hand", Loghain....all far better antagonists.

Modifié par batlin, 30 juin 2012 - 08:04 .

[Nerdage]

Dave of Canada wrote...

Or remove the concept of villain and just make certain groups / people antagonistic towards you based on prior choices (and they're perfectly reasonable people, they just oppose you).

Only if you're not forced to kill them by the score in order to oppose them.

One thing I really loved about playing wild card in Fallout NV was I don't think I killed one NCR soldier, because I sympathised with them but didn't want to join them, something DA's yet to really get. Even taking the peaceful option in Nature of the Beast you kill 5x more werewolves than you free; that all the NPCs just ignore that fact doesn't change anything.

But if I have to kill them, including the generic rank and file, they should be either evil or out for my blood.

[Swordfishtrombone]

whykikyouwhy wrote...

I don't think I can fairly guess what sort of villain might be in the next game since I don't know what the premise of the game is, what core tale is going to be told. A villain should, imo, make sense for the story. Though I always find it quite nice to have a sympathetic character as a villain - even if that entity possesses some "big bad" elements.

I agree - if it's done right. Irenicus from BG2, or Loghain from DA:O are good villains in that they have some aspect of them that you can feel some little sympathy for, while still remaining appropriately loathsome.

When it's done wrong, it is dissaster - a certain character in ME3, revealed at the very end, being a prime example. If you have a villain you've learned to hate throughout the game, or even a game seeries, and at the very end do a switcharoo, revealing the villain to be something else completely, and actually having everyone's best interests at heart, and then you are expected to co-operate with that now-ex-villain, that..... that just doesn't work. That just makes you angry and disappointed.

But if they haven't gathered as much from the ME3 ending debacle, then they are beyond hope - and I don't believe Bioware to be beyond hope. I Just hope they never, ever, repeat the mistakes they made with that confused, late-revelaed villainy-nice-guy-mongrel.

[blindchaos]

I think a central Villain would be great, if the player gets many opportunities to interact with them. One of the problems I have with Loghain and Saren, is that I never got a chance to know them before I had to fight them. Instead I just had a character give me a summary of their backstory. I can't tell you how annoying it was to hear Anderson or Arl Redcliff just spout a summary of the Villain's story from the prequel novel, instead of developing my own impressions of him.

I know players don't like to have their autonomy challenged in RPGs, and with good reason, but to make a great villain the player needs exposure to them. Either we have more interactions with them, more scenes featuring them like when Loghain hires the assassin, or make the antagonist a party member or ally who betrays you.

One of the few compliments I can give DA2 is that at least I got to know Meradith and Orsino, and had opportunities to talk to them. Their backgrounds were not just spouted out by some figure with a potential bias against them. Granted their stories were not that great, but I appreciated the direct interaction.

[Rawgrim]

I`d like a "normal" villain. Meredith jumping around like some anime villain made me cringe. I plain old evil warlord or something like that, would be nice. A fellow with a host of cool henchmen, rather than uber powers himself.

[Amycus89]

LadyJ28 wrote...

LolaLei wrote...

hero 2 wrote...

One of your companions.

Woah, that would be ****ing awesome! Kinda reminds me of Jade Empire... Don't wanna spoil it but I totally didn't see what happened in that coming!

If DA3 somehow could incorporate that type of betrayal into the story it would be the most ridiculously awesome game ever. Seriously, that was one of the best parts of Jade empire because I did not even think to question "what my character had been taught". I would say Flemeth would be a good villian but I kinda want her to be on our side because she is so awesome.

I can top this. A romancable companion.

Or alternatively, you get possessed by a demon, that finally splits with you appearance, and you pass out after that, falling into the river. The demon with your appearance then starts sending assassins and other things to get rid of you,  so you have no choice but to follow him and find out what he is planning to do in your world. As time goes on, his influence grows, and you meet some people who mistake you for him and blame you for his deeds. And in the end when you finally catch up to him, you find out the shocking truth that you are in fact the demon, and the one you have been fighting this whole time is the same person you played as a prologue. That way you can also make your prior choices in the beginning define the personality of the villain who for, obvious reasons, just want to kill you because of what you did earlier. He can still always be considered evil by taking your initial alignement to the extreme. For example, if you were lawful good in the prologue, the villain makes laws and enforces them to the letter, with no exceptions. Should give you some great moral choices on how to go from there with this new information, and make each playthrough unique, since the villain might have a different personality each time. And not to mention, it would allow your character alone being able to wield some magic and thus allow some crossclassing:wizard: that isnt possible for the other companions. Should be great to play as in a time of war between mages and templars -and its a hint as well to your true identity. 

EDIT: sorry for the bad english, must have been really tired while writing this post. Hopefully better now, and I expanded the second suggestion a bit.

Modifié par Amycus89, 01 juillet 2012 - 04:04 .

[blindchaos]

Amycus89 wrote...

LadyJ28 wrote...

LolaLei wrote...

hero 2 wrote...

One of your companions.

Woah, that would be ****ing awesome! Kinda reminds me of Jade Empire... Don't wanna spoil it but I totally didn't see what happened in that coming!

If DA3 somehow could incorporate that type of betrayal into the story it would be the most ridiculously awesome game ever. Seriously, that was one of the best parts of Jade empire because I did not even think to question "what my character had been taught". I would say Flemeth would be a good villian but I kinda want her to be on our side because she is so awesome.

I can top this. A romancable companion.

Or alternatively, you get possessed by a demon, that finally splits with you appearance and, you pass out after that falling into the river. The demon with your appearance starts sending assassins and other things to get rid of you, and in the end, you find out the shocking truth that you are in fact the demon, and the one you have been fighting this whole time is the same person you played as a prologue. That way you can also make your prior choices in the beginning define the personality of the villain who for, obvious reasons, just want to kill you because of what you did earlier. Should give you some great moral choices on how to go from there with this new information. And not to mention, it would allow your character alone being able to wield some magic and thus allow some crossclassing:wizard: that isnt possible for the other companions. Should be great to play as in a time of war between mages and templars -and its a hint as well to your true identity. 

I really like these Ideas.  The idea of a romancible companion being a villain or turned into a villain is a very cool conept.  Personally I would love to have demonic possession be a factor.  For example if there a levels in the fade, party memebers are vulnerable to some degree of possession.  Perhaps the more times you bring a party member in the fade, the more likely they are to be possessed.

The only worry I have for a party member turning evil is, considering the likelyhood that companions will be new in DA3.  is there enough time for players to bond with them before they betray you, so that the betrayal has maximum impact?

I know Isabella was kind of a traitor, though that was a fairly light example.  Though, if it could be done well, a forced or voluntary betrayal would be a great twist. 

[King Cousland]

I don't necessarily think there has to be a villain. The problem with DAII was that Meredith was clearly always going to be the end-game big bad, and her baddie emissions were in excess, which really made her a bit obvious and cliched. Despite this, she could have worked given more exposition, and if Hawke actually had a goal to work towards. I think the closest thing we got to a villain in Origins (excluding the horde, which I class as more of a goal) was Loghain, and I personally don't class him as a villain.

He is however, clearly the antagonist, and his defeat allows us to focus on our goal. So, for me the ideal "villain" in DAIII needs to be someone who has many layers, doesn't scream "LOOK AT ME, I'M SO EVIL!" like Meredith did from the get-go, whose morals and actions are questionable, but not necessarily villainous depending on your perspective. However, this can only work if our protagonist has goal to work towards.

[blindchaos]

harkness72 wrote...

I don't necessarily think there has to be a villain. The problem with DAII was that Meredith was clearly always going to be the end-game big bad, and her baddie emissions were in excess, which really made her a bit obvious and cliched. Despite this, she could have worked given more exposition, and if Hawke actually had a goal to work towards. I think the closest thing we got to a villain in Origins (excluding the horde, which I class as more of a goal) was Loghain, and I personally don't class him as a villain.

He is however, clearly the antagonist, and his defeat allows us to focus on our goal. So, for me the ideal "villain" in DAIII needs to be someone who has many layers, doesn't scream "LOOK AT ME, I'M SO EVIL!" like Meredith did from the get-go, whose morals and actions are questionable, but not necessarily villainous depending on your perspective. However, this can only work if our protagonist has goal to work towards.

I agree with almost all of your post.  If their is an antagonist, he/she/it needs to be well developed.  However, I don't think Meradith was that much worse then Loghain.  Both were fairly obvious in their status as antagonist.  DA3's villain needs to be subtler. 

I just hope we don't have a repeat of the archdemon.  A good villain needs to have motivations and personality.  A giant dragon or force of nature is a little bland.

[Tymvir]

A Chantry sister. They control both the templars and the mages, after all. If anyone is in danger of being corrupted by power, it's them.

[shadow-warlord]

Knight of Dane wrote...

Hawke!

...This sounds funny when you read it but come to think of it wouldn't it be SOOOOO AWESOME?
Just imagine the possibilities...

[Playest]

who cares as long as he's voiced by tim curry

[King Cousland]

Playest wrote...

who cares as long as he's voiced by tim curry

So Arl Howe's soul has passed into a new vessel then? 

[Kaiser Shepard]

Playest wrote...

who cares as long as he's voiced by tim curry

I'd settle for Fred Tatasciore or Cam Clarke as well.