54 réponses à ce sujet

[hero 2]

Chaos Lord Malek wrote...
The EVIL, is EVIL because its selfish, becuse its goals are only for themselves - Edwin didn't care about anyone, he wanted power, Viconia just wanted to survive , and she would gladly sell you all out, if there would be a chance to survive without the group, that iron smugling dwarf (on  K) - he didn't give a damn about anyone and anything, but his bussinies with iron along Sword Coasts.

So the main character should have a selfish goal. Hawke could have being made so, but instead he/she is saving/helping his/jher familly, and in reallity doesn't have the 'required' kind of attitude to be considered evil.

Greed/selfishness is not necessarily evil. I learnt this in my quest to dispel Ayn Rand's theories (which ultimately lead me to her nonsensical redefinition of morality). I understand evil to be doing something to hurt someone else in some way, although definitions vary. Wikipedia says "evil is commonly associated with conscious and deliberate wrongdoing". Some actions will cause someone to suffer and you might do them anyway because you benefit (let's say you buy shoes that sweatshop workers make- so there's someone suffering at the far end, but who cares because you have cheap shoes!). That's not evil, it's willful neglect of morality. 

So in your example, the main character must have an evil goal, whether or not it is a selfish one is a side-issue. 

[LobselVith8]

Fauxnormal wrote...

XxDeonxX wrote...

Tell that to my Sith warrior in TOR, or my Fable and Fable 2 characters.. I could go on naming characters but I cant really be bothered.. Anyway wishing to accomplish the primary goal of stopping the antagonist doesn't prevent the possibility of being an evil protagonist.

And yet at the end of the day, NOT counting TOR, you still saved the day. You might be a jackass along the way, but you did. That's called being a jerkass hero or an anti-hero. NOT evil.

Black and white is boring. Being an 'evil' protagonist is stupid, dull, and pointless.

Even an evil protagonist can save the day from a threat that endangers them as well - it's not as though they want to die or lose to another enemy. Silent Hill 3 had a villain wanting to stop the revival of a god that would wreck havoc on all humanity because it would be bad for him financially. He was still a villain, even though he wanted to do a good thing. Some people want the option to go through the story as a hero, anti-hero, or a villain. More choices aren't a bad thing, and not everyone shares your opinion.

[byzantine horse]

I'd like to play "evil". When I say "evil" I don't mean Sauron- or Emperor-like evil, I mean that you are a character who has a conviction, a belief, that makes you do evil things. That is much more immersive and believable than the stereotypical "Muahaha, I'll kill everyone in this village because it's fun!".

[Eternal Phoenix]

Fauxnormal wrote...

Dave of Canada wrote...

Pzykozis wrote...

Archdemon, and Meredith say hi?

That's assuming the Archdemon was the true antagonist (rather than driving force) of DA:O and not Loghain.

Meredith and Orsino were horribly written into the plot.

Fauxnormal wrote...

No. That goes completely and utterly against the point of being the protagonist. You know- the hero. 

 

Protagonist =/= hero.

No, I know that, smart ass, thank you. But your role in a video game such as DA or Mass Effect is to be the hero. Even a renegade Shep still wants to stop the collectors and save the galaxy. Even a jerkass Hawke fights for what he/she belives in.

Clearly you have forgotten some of the dialogue options and actions in Origins then. A character could be conscripted into The Grey Wardens against his/her own will and could only end up fighting the darkspawn because they want to live in the world not because they care. You could be racist against elves, you could hate mages, you could murder several people for no rational reason (you could stab the doomsayer in Redcliffe village even though no one is listening to him and you could also kill that prisoner at Ostagar just for a key to a chest not even part of the plot), you could end up killing nearly all of your companions or would-be companions and if I recall, you could even tell Alistair that you hope to gain gold and reward in the quest. So you could be motivated by your own selfish desires.

Threatening innocents out of their gold and siding with demons isn't part of the plot and you don't need to do any of these things to stop the blight. The City Elf origin even allows you to ignore the rape of several elves in exchange for gold, is that for stopping the blight too? At that point you're not even a Grey Warden. Come back to the Alienage later and you can sacrifice your old friends in a blood magic ritual or send them off to slavery just for gold or power. You can even let Alistair be executed (even though there's no need for this to be done) for the simple reason of you hating him. That's even one of the dialogue replies if I remember correctly.

Origins allowed the player to be evil and ruthless and sometimes, just a plain **** for no logical reason. Dragon Age 2 didn't alow Hawke to be any of these things and most "evil" choices were tied in with the plot and whether you were a mage or templar supporter. No one is asking to be the guy who kills innocents in one game and becomes the antagonist in the next game as the result. People are asking for evil choices.

Baldur's Gate did it and even tied it in with the plot (you even had people hunting you down and you got an interesting dialogue with a harper outside of Baldur's Gate if you had a reputation for murdering). Origins had it to some extent. Dragon Age 2 felt tame in comparison.

You also say that implementing an evil story-line in an RPG would be hard but clearly you haven't played many RPG's otherwise you would know that you wrong:

Baldur's Gate 1&2 - Allows you to become an evil god at the end of the second game. In both games you can also murder people and be hunted down for it. Characters also mention your evil deeds.

Planescape Torment - Allows you murder people just ike Baldur's Gate and your alignment changes based on your deeds. Like with Baldur's Gate, there were consequences for your actions and people responded to what you did.

Neverwinter Nights - Allows you to say that you're only motivated for gold and don't care about saving lives. The game also allows you to rob people's houses and murder. You can also make your employers (your a mercenary basically) give you more more money in exchange for your services.

Neverwinter Nights Hordes of the Underdark - Allows you to betray your allies near the end of Chapter 2 to side with an evil drow in return for wealth and power. If your character is a male, the drow even offers herself to the character. One of the evil endings has you become an archdevil who rules over one of the Hells.

Overlord 1 - Allows you to destroy villages and become down-right evil. NPC's even remark upon your deeds and many NPC's will be scared of you and bow before you if you're evil. You can even make some people your slaves. The result of being evil is that the Overlord becomes demonic looking and his spells are more destructive. Alternatively you can be good which results in people praising you and your spells are more beneficial to your minions. Your alignment also effects how your tower looks like. You could even destroy the entire elven race.

Two Worlds 1 - Allows you to slaughter nearly everyone in the game. You can also join a necromancer faction who asks you to poison a village's water supply which results in everyone in that village dying. One of the endings has you join up with Gandohar as he releases an evil god back into the world.

Dark Souls - Allows you to slaughter innocents, join a murderous covenant and drain the souls of people and then to top it all off, you can become a god at the end of the game who seeks to destroy all life if that is your motivation. Like with the entire plot, the endings of Dark Souls are open to interpretation and whether your character is evil or good is up to you to decide. Some choices are clearly evil though, like killing a defenseless young female priest who is lost in a dark crypt just so you can absorb her humanity. 

Other RPG's allow you to be lawful evil but always have an ending of you saving the day. This isn't because it's hard to implement an evil ending, it's because the developers have a canon in-store (the sequel is going to take off from one ending) or are just too lazy to add alternative endings.

Modifié par Elton John is dead, 08 juillet 2012 - 04:10 .

[Fauxnormal]

LobselVith8 wrote...

Fauxnormal wrote...

XxDeonxX wrote...

Tell that to my Sith warrior in TOR, or my Fable and Fable 2 characters.. I could go on naming characters but I cant really be bothered.. Anyway wishing to accomplish the primary goal of stopping the antagonist doesn't prevent the possibility of being an evil protagonist.

And yet at the end of the day, NOT counting TOR, you still saved the day. You might be a jackass along the way, but you did. That's called being a jerkass hero or an anti-hero. NOT evil.

Black and white is boring. Being an 'evil' protagonist is stupid, dull, and pointless.

Even an evil protagonist can save the day from a threat that endangers them as well - it's not as though they want to die or lose to another enemy. Silent Hill 3 had a villain wanting to stop the revival of a god that would wreck havoc on all humanity because it would be bad for him financially. He was still a villain, even though he wanted to do a good thing. Some people want the option to go through the story as a hero, anti-hero, or a villain. More choices aren't a bad thing, and not everyone shares your opinion.

And not everyone shares yours. Last time I checked, I can state my opinion here, too.

Being an 'evil' protagonist is stupid, dull, pointless, and boring.

^____^

[A Crusty Knight Of Colour]

Mask of the Betrayer had a freakin sweet Evil PC.

So did Alpha Protocol.

New Vegas kinda had a good slant for evil characters too.

Maybe BioWare should contract Obsidian for a spinoff?

Still, I don't think it's a good fit for the Dragon Age universe where you're essentially a hero with varying personalities (much like Mass Effect).

Modifié par CrustyBot, 08 juillet 2012 - 03:54 .

[Grand Admiral Cheesecake]

CrustyBot wrote...

Mask of the Betrayer had a freakin sweet Evil PC.

So did Alpha Protocol.

New Vegas kinda had a good slant for evil characters too.

Maybe BioWare should contract Obsidian for a spinoff?

Still, I don't think it's a good fit for the Dragon Age universe where you're essentially a hero with varying personalities (much like Mass Effect).

That would not end well.

[Eternal Phoenix]

CrustyBot wrote...

Mask of the Betrayer had a freakin sweet Evil PC.

So did Alpha Protocol.

New Vegas kinda had a good slant for evil characters too.

Maybe BioWare should contract Obsidian for a spinoff?

Still, I don't think it's a good fit for the Dragon Age universe where you're essentially a hero with varying personalities (much like Mass Effect).

I thought Origins handled it well but meh. I guess murder is not enough nowadays.

 

[Chaos Lord Malek]

The best evil character, i seen in RPGs (where its option, not like in other types of games, something like Kratos, Kain, etc... who are bad guys right from start) is probably in Planescape Torment. Which offers you options to betray, steal, murder, etc... only rape is missing i think (maybe even that's there, i don't remember the romances now). Fallout 2 had nice evil characters as well, i always liked being a slaver, but the game wasn't as detailed with each character and quest as PS:T (though it was longer of course).

So if Bioware would set a goal that isn't about saving the world, or some other crappy 'higher cause' (typical Higher Cause, is fighting to free mages), it could work well.

Modifié par Chaos Lord Malek, 08 juillet 2012 - 04:19 .

[ohnotherancor]

CrustyBot wrote...

Mask of the Betrayer had a freakin sweet Evil PC.

So did Alpha Protocol.

New Vegas kinda had a good slant for evil characters too.

Maybe BioWare should contract Obsidian for a spinoff?

Still, I don't think it's a good fit for the Dragon Age universe where you're essentially a hero with varying personalities (much like Mass Effect).

I would buy that in a heartbeat.

Although it'd probably be more prudent to wait for patches.

[BIO18]

Fauxnormal wrote...

LobselVith8 wrote...

Fauxnormal wrote...

XxDeonxX wrote...

Tell that to my Sith warrior in TOR, or my Fable and Fable 2 characters.. I could go on naming characters but I cant really be bothered.. Anyway wishing to accomplish the primary goal of stopping the antagonist doesn't prevent the possibility of being an evil protagonist.

And yet at the end of the day, NOT counting TOR, you still saved the day. You might be a jackass along the way, but you did. That's called being a jerkass hero or an anti-hero. NOT evil.

Black and white is boring. Being an 'evil' protagonist is stupid, dull, and pointless.

Even an evil protagonist can save the day from a threat that endangers them as well - it's not as though they want to die or lose to another enemy. Silent Hill 3 had a villain wanting to stop the revival of a god that would wreck havoc on all humanity because it would be bad for him financially. He was still a villain, even though he wanted to do a good thing. Some people want the option to go through the story as a hero, anti-hero, or a villain. More choices aren't a bad thing, and not everyone shares your opinion.

And not everyone shares yours. Last time I checked, I can state my opinion here, too.

Being an 'evil' protagonist is stupid, dull, pointless, and boring.

^____^

WOW I can see you are a little child, well you know what. I can be a little dumb kid too.
I THINK that being a "good" protagonist is stupid, dull, pointless, and boring.
... Look at how smart I'm being...

But in all seriousness I think that playing a good guy is way to cliché, but I don't say its "stupid, dull, pointless, and boring" Because some people think its cool, and I respect their point of view.
But what I don't respect is your dumb ass comments, people have been showing you that you are wrong with LONG and very interesting comments, and you just answer "derp, no its stupid"
Make a structured comment,n explain why its "stupid" and why your opinion is better then everybody else... maybe then your opinion will matter.

[hero 2]

byzantine horse wrote...

I'd like to play "evil". When I say "evil" I don't mean Sauron- or Emperor-like evil, I mean that you are a character who has a conviction, a belief, that makes you do evil things. That is much more immersive and believable than the stereotypical "Muahaha, I'll kill everyone in this village because it's fun!".

You've pointed out two different philosophies. Unfortunately for you, the Sauron/Emperor evil is the only one that actually IS evil. The other one is like ... say the conservatives/republican party - they have a conviction and a goal and lots of people will be hurt by them persuing it, but they are not specifically evil.

[Rockworm503]

 As far as I'm concerned any self respecting RPG would give you the option to go evil.  I wanted an option to side with Loghain (not extremely evil) or even sabotaging your team to help the darkspawn win (a game all about choice Why the Flubber not)
I was really hoping for a way to help the reapers win but alas no.

[Fast Jimmy]

I'd rather have my protagonist be cheeky and funny. A dark, spiteful protagonist just seems cruel and tragic.

...evil protagonists...!

I'M GOING TO PISTOL WHIP THE NEXT PERSON WHO SAYS PROTAGONIST!

[Arius23]

They need to get rid of the good/bad dichotomy and focus more on hard decisions that have no distinctly good or bad outcomes.

[Rockworm503]

Arius23 wrote...

They need to get rid of the good/bad dichotomy and focus more on hard decisions that have no distinctly good or bad outcomes.

I like this one.  He will be spared.

[Fast Jimmy]

sjpelkessjpeler wrote...

Fast Jimmy wrote...

I'd rather have my protagonist be cheeky and funny. A dark, spiteful protagonist just seems cruel and tragic.

...evil protagonists...!

I'M GOING TO PISTOL WHIP THE NEXT PERSON WHO SAYS PROTAGONIST!

Erm, Jimmy why would you want to do that ?

Sorry, sorry... that was an attempt at modifying a Super Troopers movie quote... I'm not going to pistol whip any one. 

[hero 2]

sjpelkessjpeler wrote...

Depending on how ones view on things are, what is good or evil can be the opposite from each other. Supporting the mages f.e. is evil in the eyes of one while supporting the templars for another.

No, that's not evil either. It seems that a lot of posters here don't even know what they are asking for.

Arius23 wrote...

They need to get rid of the good/bad dichotomy and focus more on hard decisions that have no distinctly good or bad outcomes.

 

I agree with this. The good/bad thing is just stupid. There should be repercussions for our actions as there are in reality, but they should not be faces being dark-side corrupted. The repercussions of an evil act should be societal rejection/judicial punishment. It's as simple as that. Good luck making that into a game.

[Cultist]

There are things that coincidered as "evil" by most people, so better stick to them. F.e:
- Killing children.
- Slave trade
- Murdering innocent and helpless.
- Abusing power for personal gain, not a "higher goal".
- Setting innocent people up.
I, personally, would liketo see ability to corrupt. To corrupt your companions, to corrupt those, who speak with you. Corrrupt with your decisions and so on. the tricky part is that if you can justify every dark deed you made. Rape? Raped woman will bear a child that will have a powers to save the world. Child killing? See "Omen".
One thing I almost never see is PC beyond redemption. Who cannot and will not change his or her ways. If I'm not mistaken D&D got prestige class of Angel Slayer - who is beyond any redemption and so deep into dark and evil ways that it imposible to justify his actions. Would like to see Dragon Age protagonist, who embraces Blood Magic to control and rule over people, who kill his family to obtain the inheritance. To force entire Circle after Orsino's death to embrace blood Magic would be awesome.

[hero 2]

Cultist wrote...
There are things that coincidered as "evil" by most people, so better stick to them. F.e:

- Killing children.
- Slave trade
- Murdering innocent and helpless.
- Abusing power for personal gain, not a "higher goal".
- Setting innocent people up.

Still not necessarily evil. I believe that your "evil protagonist" would have to wilfully harm people (mentally or physically) for their own gratification.

Modifié par hero 2, 09 juillet 2012 - 11:41 .

[ashwind]

I think it is better to just drop the entire alignment/morality entirely.

No Children please - developers always do not allow us to kill children no matter how annoying they are so... please no children - and after playing Skyrim, I think killing those brats are in noway evil.

p/s: Ah - and in ME3 - the entire galaxy dies if you so much as shoots a VI that just looks like a kid 

Modifié par ashwind, 09 juillet 2012 - 12:27 .

[Gibb_Shepard]

Cultist wrote...

There are things that coincidered as "evil" by most people, so better stick to them. F.e:
- Killing children.
- Slave trade
- Murdering innocent and helpless.
- Abusing power for personal gain, not a "higher goal".
- Setting innocent people up.

The only thing that can really be considered "evil" is sadism. Everything there can be justified with a greater good at stake. You may kill Connor to ensure that the village of people come to no harm. In Loghain's case, he sold Elves into slavery to fund the defense effort for his country.