90 réponses à ce sujet

[Herr Uhl]

The Hierophant wrote...

The new featiures people tout as original were already done before in ME & ME2, Final Fantasy 12, and The Way of The Samurai series since way back in 2.

Not played FF12 or The Way of the Samurai, but in ME and ME2 the villains were pretty much the physical embodiment of armageddon if not evil.

[Rawgrim]

Plaintiff wrote...

Rawgrim wrote...

Plaintiff wrote...

Something more innovative and compelling than the phyiscal manifestation of ultimate evil that is sooooooooooooo common in fantasy. You can say what you like about DA:O, but it's not winning any prizes for originality.

and DA2 is?

It should.

Whats original about it, pray tell?

[Rawgrim]

Plaintiff wrote...

The Hierophant wrote...

Plaintiff wrote...

Rawgrim wrote...

Plaintiff wrote...

Something more innovative and compelling than the phyiscal manifestation of ultimate evil that is sooooooooooooo common in fantasy. You can say what you like about DA:O, but it's not winning any prizes for originality.

and DA2 is?

It should.

The new featiures people tout as original were already done before in ME & ME2, Final Fantasy 12, and The Way of The Samurai series since way back in 2.

I dunno what the hell you're talking about, I'm referring expressly to the narrative.

You mean the story within a story narrative? Thats not original at all. Several rpgs have done the same thing. Last time i saw it was in Drakensang 2, a game that came out 1-2 years before DA2. This one also had a dwarf telling the story, by the way.

[Helena Tylena]

I think he meant more along the lines of having a villain for political reasons, rather than them wanting to destroy the world for the sake of destroying the world.

[Rawgrim]

Helena Tylena wrote...

I think he meant more along the lines of having a villain for political reasons, rather than them wanting to destroy the world for the sake of destroying the world.

Also been done plenty.

[The Hierophant]

Well for a main antagonist i hope that Da3 has someone or entity who are fully developed in their temperament, morality, actions, history, and pc interaction before the final confrontation. Meredith & Orsino lacked screen time which made them 1 dimensional in persona, and agenda. The two examples below are chess masters who use indirect methods to achieve their goals, are not brainwashed or insane, have a moment of doubt(Xanatos) or moments of internal conflict(Sydney) without being emo, and are family men.

David Xanatos...



Sydney Losstarot...




Also another good example of antagonists who's persona borders on ruthless, and pragmatic imo would be the Elder God from Lok, Solidor Vayne, and Palpatine. They like the other two are chess masters, but would do anything to achieve their goals regardless if innocents are killed, plus the Elder God was voiced by the late great Tony Jay.

I have no problem with chaotic evil villains like The Joker, Kefka, Donquixote Doflamingo, but i tend to gravitate more towards the above examples.

[Boss Fog]

Originality shouldn't be what's important since it's so difficult to do nowadays since everything is a different version of something else. The most important aspect should be whether or not the story and its antagonist are compelling in the sense that the player is motivated to defeat them in regards to the story and narrative. You shouldn't want to defeat a character in a game because you find them stupid or annoying in regards to the player's preference.

[The Hierophant]

Plaintiff wrote....

I dunno what the hell you're talking about, I'm referring expressly to the narrative.

Nope the Way of The Samurai Series have been doing similar style narrative for almost a decade, but they actually succeeded in making a cohesive story, and the transition of time between events fluid.

Modifié par The Hierophant, 22 novembre 2012 - 05:55 .

[Rawgrim]

I think i have run into more main villains that are out to change the world, rather than destroy it. The arch-demon is actually alot less of the norm, than the ones in DA2.

[Kidd]

Someone who is a person. A person does not necessarily have to be a human. Just something I can talk to, understand, disagree with and kill with fire. Loghain is a good antagonist, the archdemon less so. Irenicus, Kerrigan and Kefka are some other great villains to me~

[The Hierophant]

Herr Uhl wrote...

The Hierophant wrote...

The new features people tout as original were already done before in ME & ME2, Final Fantasy 12, and The Way of The Samurai series since way back in 2.

Not played FF12 or The Way of the Samurai, but in ME and ME2 the villains were pretty much the physical embodiment of armageddon if not evil.

<just noticed> I was thinking more of Saren, the illusive man, even though they were indoctrinated, and The Catalyst while it's not evil, it's derpy logic is off putting.

[Wulfram]

Someone sane, and not under magical control or influence.

[Cain Corvin]

I would llike to see Flemeth, or perhabs the leader of a grand qunari invasion. or maybe have a character like logain who is plotting against you. you really got some seriously anger build up!

[Dabrikishaw]

Guilebrush wrote...

I really don't get how the Archdemon is viewed as the primary antagonist of DA:O.

Becuase she is. The Archdemon is the whole reason there is a plot in Dragon Age: Origins. Loghain is a Hate Sink for the player until they gather the resocurces to comfront the Archdemon.

As for the question at hand, I would also like to face the Maker, or even Andraste.

[Plaintiff]

Rawgrim wrote...

Plaintiff wrote...

The Hierophant wrote...

Plaintiff wrote...

Rawgrim wrote...

Plaintiff wrote...

Something more innovative and compelling than the phyiscal manifestation of ultimate evil that is sooooooooooooo common in fantasy. You can say what you like about DA:O, but it's not winning any prizes for originality.

and DA2 is?

It should.

The new featiures people tout as original were already done before in ME & ME2, Final Fantasy 12, and The Way of The Samurai series since way back in 2.

I dunno what the hell you're talking about, I'm referring expressly to the narrative.

You mean the story within a story narrative? Thats not original at all. Several rpgs have done the same thing. Last time i saw it was in Drakensang 2, a game that came out 1-2 years before DA2. This one also had a dwarf telling the story, by the way.

The frame narrtive is not particularly common, but that's not what I was referring to.

I mean that the story that DA2 tells is almost a complete removal from the standard, Tolkien-esque claptrap we've come to expect from the fantasy genre in general. It is not an adventure, there is no "villain", and no singular goal. It's more like an episodic interpersonal/political drama.

And I think, considering they were working with a form that is not common to gaming, and that they probably weren't familiar with personally, that they pulled it off pretty well. And I really, really hope they continue to experiment with other narrative forms, rather than reverting straight back to another standard plot with standard execution.

[Rawgrim]

Plaintiff wrote...

Rawgrim wrote...

Plaintiff wrote...

The Hierophant wrote...

Plaintiff wrote...

Rawgrim wrote...

Plaintiff wrote...

Something more innovative and compelling than the phyiscal manifestation of ultimate evil that is sooooooooooooo common in fantasy. You can say what you like about DA:O, but it's not winning any prizes for originality.

and DA2 is?

It should.

The new featiures people tout as original were already done before in ME & ME2, Final Fantasy 12, and The Way of The Samurai series since way back in 2.

I dunno what the hell you're talking about, I'm referring expressly to the narrative.

You mean the story within a story narrative? Thats not original at all. Several rpgs have done the same thing. Last time i saw it was in Drakensang 2, a game that came out 1-2 years before DA2. This one also had a dwarf telling the story, by the way.

The frame narrtive is not particularly common, but that's not what I was referring to.

I mean that the story that DA2 tells is almost a complete removal from the standard, Tolkien-esque claptrap we've come to expect from the fantasy genre in general. It is not an adventure, there is no "villain", and no singular goal. It's more like an episodic interpersonal/political drama.

And I think, considering they were working with a form that is not common to gaming, and that they probably weren't familiar with personally, that they pulled it off pretty well. And I really, really hope they continue to experiment with other narrative forms, rather than reverting straight back to another standard plot with standard execution.

A political drama where you can`t influence any outcome at all. The whole thing was set in stone. its a very common way to stories for video games. Thousands of action games have done the same thing.

[Plaintiff]

The Hierophant wrote...

Plaintiff wrote....

I dunno what the hell you're talking about, I'm referring expressly to the narrative.

Nope the Way of The Samurai Series have been doing similar style narrative for almost a decade, but they actually succeeded in making a cohesive story, and the transition of time between events fluid.

So what? Every fantasy story in the world has been using the basic Hero's Journey template that DA:O followed right down to the letter. Just because one game series from another continent, that the Bioware writers likely haven't played, used similar narrative structure doesn't undo the fact that DA2's plot is still more original than most of the schlock out there.

If the writers for Way of the Samurai did it better, then good on them, apparently they've had more practice.

Modifié par Plaintiff, 22 novembre 2012 - 07:20 .

[Plaintiff]

Rawgrim wrote...
A political drama where you can`t influence any outcome at all. The whole thing was set in stone.

So? The endings of DA:O are also less varied than people like to pretend, and I don't care about the ability to influence outcome anyway. Most games don't have it. 

its a very common way to stories for video games. Thousands of action games have done the same thing.

Like?

[Rawgrim]

Plaintiff wrote...

Rawgrim wrote...
A political drama where you can`t influence any outcome at all. The whole thing was set in stone.

So? The endings of DA:O are also less varied than people like to pretend, and I don't care about the ability to influence outcome anyway. Most games don't have it. 

its a very common way to stories for video games. Thousands of action games have done the same thing.

Like?

99 percent of rpgs lets you influence the ending, yes. If you haven`t noticed that you haven`t played an rpg before.

Thousands of action games has a set in stone story and ending. That was the other point. Try playing any action game, and find your proof.

[Pzykozis]

Sacred_Fantasy wrote...

The Teryn of Whatever wrote...

Sacred_Fantasy wrote...

The Maker and whoever create those old gods.

That sounds like we'd be treading into Mass Effect 3's ending territory. Also, assuming the Maker even exists, how do you take on a being that created all of existence?

How to take on the Maker? 

It's easy. With Sword like you did with the archdemon, Meredith, Orsino etc..

See this?

This is what happen to fictional god. Like the Hulk said," Puny God"

Don't worry. Despite BioWare claim the god(s) is/are immortal(s) they are still can be killed or at least imprison. I doubt He even poweful enough to be the creator of universe.

Njeh, that's what happens when you let whedon brohumour a film.

I second the thoughts on something similar to Letho set up from TW2, complete reversal of the idea of having a big bad, the reason for the game wasn't so much to catch and stop him, it was simply to answer the question of who and why the antagnoist did what he did, and he was justified if abit naive.

I'm still suprised people actually like to have mindless evil or moustache twirling as an end goal.

[Fortlowe]

Villains are tough to write. Much as I know you have to be willing to send the protagonist to hell and back (and maybe even not back), often times a good villain has to have suffered even more than the hero. The best villains have motives that not only are easily understood, but also unnervingly sympathetic. On top of that the villain must also do things that are so unforgivable, that even if you do sympathize with their cause, you'd stand against them anyway; not because it's moral but just because you truly hate or fear them.

To me, the Joker is the perfect villain. Say what you will about his sanity or lack thereof, but his core belief is that society is insane and he often convincingly demonstrates the validity of his perspective. But he's a monster. He does unforgivable things to prove his point. But he didn't start out that way. He was a comedian, and a husband, and a father to be, and struggling to make ends meet like a lot of normal schmucks. In trying to make his life better, he made some bad decisions that put him marginally on the wrong side of the law; and worse, deeply on the wrong side of the criminal element. Then corruption and justice each came swooping in and collapsed his mundane little existence. Just trying to live cost him his job, his family, his health, and ultimately his sanity. And he's been understandably making both sides of the law pay ever since.

I say all this because I am really hoping Hawke will become the supreme big bad in Dragon Age. It's plausible and wonderfully poetic. Whether you played Hawke as diplomatic, sarcastic, or aggressive, the fact of the matter is that YOU, the player, were the guiding hand in making a Villain that makes the Blight look like a cake walk. Same as Batman and the mob wound up making the Joker.

Modifié par Fortlowe, 22 novembre 2012 - 07:42 .

[The Six Path of Pain]

In Origins the Final boss was the Archdemon but the main antagonist was Loghain,so you got the best of both worlds.Meredith was just crazy and power hungry,and that type of villain could work if written correctly but it wasn't.I also hated how you never got to hear about her back story unless you were pro templar.Kind of hard to symphatize with her in a pro mage playthrough if you don't know why the hell she is like that in the first place .Orsino just didn't make any sense since bioware only f@%ked up his character to get another boss fight.So I don't know and I really don't care,I don't mind if I go up against some ancient evil since that kind of supposed cliche stuff doesn't bother me.Maybe Bioware should look at some of Yoshihiro Togashi's work,because that guy is a genius at writing good villains.

[Giltspur]

I like for the villain to be sympathetic and an obstacle to whatever the protagonist wants.  Hey, how original.  At any rate, I think that works best with a human, elf, dwarf or qunari.  Perhaps it could work with a smart enough demon or spirit or darkspawn.   I liked Loghain and Arishok best from Dragon Age, thought there wasn't as much going on with Archdemon (though I thought it was fine for the role it played and had interesting lore behind it) and would have liked Meredith more had the lyrium idol not been a factor.  So far Jade Empire and BG2 have had my favorite Bioware antagonists. 

[BouncyFrag]

Bowser

[Plaintiff]

Rawgrim wrote...
99 percent of rpgs lets you influence the ending, yes. If you haven`t noticed that you haven`t played an rpg before.

I'm aware of RPG conventions, I'm also aware they're a niche genre.

Thousands of action games has a set in stone story and ending. That was the other point. Try playing any action game, and find your proof.

I thought you meant that thousands of action games were interpersonal/political dramas.

I am talking about the kind of story that is being told, not game mechanics. You're not actually addressing anything I said at all.