87 réponses à ce sujet

[Ryllen Laerth Kriel]

The darkspawn are evil, sure, but what is the alternative to fighting them? Darkspawn kill good or evil humans, elves, dwarves, qunari alike. I suppose there could be an option to run away from the Blight and hide out in Orlais while other people fight it. But that would make for a boring game and would likely add another 5 years to the production of the game just to include the Orlesian Empire. I found quite a few evil/dark/unlaweful paths in dialogue options or in quests. I won't go into them here, but I found a few.

[Gecon]

Deception_2112 wrote...

The Chantry i sincerely wanted to eradicate everytime i encountered them, but there was never an option for that.

 Hehe yeah.

[blazin130791]

Gecon wrote...

Deception_2112 wrote...

The Chantry i sincerely wanted to eradicate everytime i encountered them, but there was never an option for that.

 Hehe yeah.

probably cus the chantry is a massive organisation who would own 1 warden and his buddies.

[theczaroftsars]

There is enough motivation in many parts of the game to be 'evil or immoral': To gain more power- extra talents + extra attributes and health. To gain more wealth - cash + equipment. To gain more satisfaction - for those who enjoy the acts of lying, cheating, stealing, killing.



There are some events that dont even involve quests and can be done through dialog with the npcs throughout the world. For example there are a few items out there that you can only get by lying, cheating, stealing or just straight up murder, like that one guy in the first area after your origin, there is an item you can only get there and by using one of the above immoral methods. You have to be greedy and self-serving at some points to gain some equipment that you would not gain otherwise.

As for consequences and overall game relevance, there are also enough evil choices that affect the game as a whole, such as your choices in that place under the dwarven city

[Dark83]

menasure wrote...
"ok so you have some armies, now why can't you use them to settle the ruler dispute?"

You don't have any armies.

[Mikey_205]

A lot of the main stories had a manipulative ending, whereby you recruit stronger allies. Some plots let you get personal power without anyone finding out. You can manipulate the important event near the end of the game to the point where you gain huge political power and backstab people who's support you want after its finished. You could use the entire blight as a chance to be as greedy and selfish as you want with the foresight that ending it will make you a hero anyway. You can subtly make people more bitter by gaining their trust and then abandoning them. You can choose a coward's self serving way out at the end.

[Taritu]

Evil people aren't on the side of other evil people or creatures as a rule. If I'm evil and someone pays me to take out another evil guy, sure, why not?



But, more to the point, half the quests aren't going to be for evil people, because most ordinary people who play games want to be the hero, not the villain. Notice the game wasn't set up with getting woken up by the darkspawn, rarrggghhhh, lead them to destroy the world as the new archdemon!

[Ibian]

Most peo... no. Quite a lot of people enjoy playing badguys. Kerrigan from Starcraft, and the Swarm in general, has such great appeal in part because they are evil and want to take over the universe.



If there was an actual dark side questline in the KOTOR games, that might just have been a more popular path than the light side story we got. Same with the BGs.



Good is boring.

[Bibdy]

Dark83 wrote...

There's never a reason for the most evil, self-serving character to reject requests out of hand, in any scenario. If you want to be a jackass and not listen to people, why should they pester the heavily armed and dangerous Warden? Why should being a rude, anti-social jerk be rewarded? It certainly isn't in life. Being a murderous psychopath won't get you anywhere either.
The "stupid psychopath" way is to kill things for no reason. The "stupid jackass" way is to insult and reject everyone. The "self-serving, evil" way is to demand rewards and exploit those who want your help.

Aptly put. Going around with an intergalactic space douchebag to everybody isn't going to get you anywhere. Not without a veritable army at your back, whom you rule with an Iron Fist (as opposed to them volunteering their services to you and assisting in defeating a common enemy).

[Aesira]

Not much problem with being bad in DAO (3rd evil playthrough here).
At least ways better than being evil in many many other games.

Motive... hmm... usually you get alot more loot and money being the bad guy. And to be honest, not having to kiss everyone's @ss in computer game is reward for me enough for being evil.

MINOR SPOILER:

The only downside is the party selection, which is kind of crappy, Morrigan is the only reliable choice, everyone else tends to whine everytime I stomp kittens, but oh well.

Modifié par Aesira, 17 décembre 2009 - 07:14 .

[Sylixe]

blazin130791 wrote...

to be a blood mage or reaver

I'm still trying to figure out what the advantage of being a Reaver is.   Seems like a class they just came up with at the last minute and never really put any thought into.

[Ibian]

Evainelithe wrote...

Gah you people still don't get it. Yes there are plenty of evil things to do in the game but none of it is sensible. No evil person with half a mind would actually do any of it. Oh, nevermind.

No, we get it. It's just there is nothing to do about it. No matter what choices are made, this games story is essentially set. We can influence minor things within the greater story, but no matter what we are still stuck with "gather an army, kick the blights ass, the end".

This is essentially a retelling of LOTR except instead of Gandalf we have Duncan, and we were spared annoying halfpints as protagonists (dwarves are kickass halfpints).

[Mikey_205]

Hardly a retelling of LOTR in any way shape or form, since over half that book is about Frodo's journey to destroy the ring.

[Dark83]

Evainelithe wrote...

Gah you people still don't get it. Yes there are plenty of evil things to do in the game but none of it is sensible. No evil person with half a mind would actually do any of it. Oh, nevermind.

We're discussing "evil" again? I thought you said it was where you wouldn't bother to take on jobs for money, which is "apathy".

[Wicket20]

I would say my character tends to do the right thing most of the time. Though on few occasions i have had the opportunity to gain more of a reward for doing the "unlawful" thing. I am a rogue after all.

[kalniel]

PsychoBlonde wrote...

I was playing through the game a bit more today, and it occurred to me that there is never (or almost never) any good (as in, well done) motivation for the PLAYER to play as a "bad" character.  DA has some difference simply because there are often "bad" effects even from the "good" options, but in many cases there is still the generic "accept the quest, be nice" vs. "don't accept the quest, be an ass" option.  The trouble is, why would the player not accept the quest?

Because they accepted it on the last play through and want to try something different. Or because this is a roleplaying game and they're (and I know this is an odd thought) roleplaying the character...

If the only reason players played games was XP and loot we'd wouldn't be bothering with a game that wastes so many zots on other elements.

[Bibdy]

I think if they're trying to sell the game as a dark, gritty, multiple-shades-of-grey type of atmosphere, there should probably be more decisions that conflict with a good player's morality i.e. being nice all the time, doesn't really help you achieve your goals. Every now and then going around making the world a super happy place of bunnies and roses makes it HARDER to win the game, not easier. Its not easy to come up with a lot of scenarios where that's the case in this kind of theme, mind you. At least not with my own stunted creativity. But, that's why the world has writers

There's probably a few in the game already, but none I can think of which have a really significant impact.

Modifié par Bibdy, 17 décembre 2009 - 09:21 .

[SheffSteel]

Sometimes even the most evil of characters has to hold their nose and do a good deed because there is good money involved - or, at least, the prospect of roasted marmoset for supper.

Out of character... you shouldn't need a metagame reason to play part of the game. Having the choice to do so isn't a bad thing.

Modifié par SheffSteel, 17 décembre 2009 - 09:34 .

[Dark83]

Being nice all the time will make you poor.

[hero 2]

I'm going with the OP on this one, you guys can talk all you like.



You have to accept quests or you don't get exps, it's dumb but there it is. If *** is with you, you often get negative rep from doing so, even when you feel forced into accepting.



/shrug.

[Bibdy]

hero 2 wrote...

I'm going with the OP on this one, you guys can talk all you like.

You have to accept quests or you don't get exps, it's dumb but there it is. If *** is with you, you often get negative rep from doing so, even when you feel forced into accepting.

/shrug.

So what would be your ideal alternative? Lop their head off on the spot and get rewarded the same amount of XP, money and items had you gone roaming around the countryside, killed a bunch of creatures, grabbed an item and brought it all the way back?

The effort-reward ratio in that case is a little off

[SheffSteel]

I think it is all too easy to be evil in this game.

Character asks you to rescue their X from Y, or kill N Zs that are out there in the wilderness.

You do so, gaining experience and loot, and turn round and say "Where is my payment?" and then you say "No, that is not enough". If necessary you intimidate them.

Maybe I'm noticing it because it's my second playthrough and I'm not trying so hard to be nice.