162 réponses à ce sujet

[Sacred_Fantasy]

TCBC_Freak wrote...

So, you want to play the bad guy? If I am to understand you this is what you want. To be the antagonist, the exact opposite of the protagonist. This is why some people felt that the Renegade Shepard was not "realistic" because they couldn't get it straight that he wasn't evil, just kind of a a*hole but he still wanted to stop the reapers who were evil. Being evil means you are, by definition, not the hero and thus not the main character in a STORY, which must have a hero and a villain or it isn't a story, it's just an anecdote and unworthy of a my $60.

So, Shepard is not the hero and the main character in Mass Effect when he contrrol the reapers by becoming the reapers himself? I know it's suck but that's what happen in BioWare story.

TCBC_Freak wrote...

On a bit of a side note, as I personally don't think this is all you want but it comes up a bit: Games that let you kill randoms (like Skyrim, Fallout, GTA, Fable, Infamous, and Dishonored {which I'll note also lets you go trough the whole game without killing anyone if you want as well} to name a few) do it for one of two reason; they either want to make the most real world possible kind of like a simulated reality and in the real world you could kill anyone you want, or they do it because even if you get bored with the "story" you might still put in the game to waste time just running random people over (I'm looking at you GTA).

Yeah, and I'm glad they attempt to do so. Virtual reality is a way to the future gaming now, especially with the introduction of  3D Virtual Reality where anything is possible.

TCBC_Freak wrote...


Dragon Age is a fantasy game and it's about story; if you get bored then they've failed at their job.

They fail their job horribly with DA 2, to me. But then again they failed their job with Lady Aribeth in Neverwinter Nights, so I'm not really surprised with their boring story. Hopefully, DA 3 will be 100x better than ME 2  in term of story, since they wanted so much to copy ME 2's formula, which resulted the changes in direction for DA 2. 

TCBC_Freak wrote...



So just out of curiosity. Which of the following is the type of evil you think would make the game more fun to play out?
Evil:
1. morally wrong or bad; immoral; wicked: "evil deeds; an evil life."
2. harmful; injurious.
3. characterized or accompanied by misfortune or suffering; unfortunate; disastrous: "to be fallen on evil days."
4. due to actual or imputed bad conduct or character: "an evil reputation."
5. marked by anger, irritability, irascibility, etc.: "He is known for his evil disposition."

Does it matter? Evil character doesn't need to explain his motive and reason. He can be selfish or sturggling for survival in conditions that required him to act, "wicked" for a choice that he's willing to take for the good of others and people will oppose him anyway. 

[NasreddinHodja]

I wonder what it says about the mentality of gamers that what we laud about sandbox games like GTA or Elder Scrolls is that they allow us to commit indiscriminate murder...

[terdferguson123]

I think the problem with becoming a super villain in DA games is the carry over choice aspect. Think about it, if you completely destroyed a nation through your evil deeds in one game, carrying that over to the next would be incredibly difficult and Bioware would have to create 2 completely different games.

The point is, those who want a truly evil character would have to set themselves up for dissapointment in future releases where there choices are not taken literally.

Personally, I think DA has done a good job of giving us the right amount of being evil, yet still being justifiable. After all, siding with the golems after knowing about how they are created seems like a pretty evil act right? Or allowing Anders to live after assasinating everyone in the chantry might seem evil right? (or is it?). That's kind of the point of DA morals, they have two sides, what seems like evil may be somewhat justifiable. Take Loghain for example, was what he did truly evil? Or best for the nation? Many people will have differing opinions on the matter.

Modifié par terdferguson123, 04 décembre 2012 - 05:21 .

[Riverdaleswhiteflash]

NasreddinHodja wrote...

I wonder what it says about the mentality of gamers that what we laud about sandbox games like GTA or Elder Scrolls is that they allow us to commit indiscriminate murder...

I don't murder indiscriminately!

Well, not in TES...

Actually, not in such GTA games as I have a gang on my side either. I discriminate in VC and SA...

[NasreddinHodja]

Riverdaleswhiteflash wrote...

NasreddinHodja wrote...

I wonder what it says about the mentality of gamers that what we laud about sandbox games like GTA or Elder Scrolls is that they allow us to commit indiscriminate murder...

I don't murder indiscriminately!

Well, not in TES...

Actually, not in such GTA games as I have a gang on my side either. I discriminate in VC and SA...

Oh well, discriminate murder, then.  

Joking aside, and this has been touched by other posters too, wanton acts of evil doesn't seem to fit the Dragon Age narrative.  The game doesn't even have a karma meter.  Instead, you're given the options of doing things of various shades of horribleness (that's a word, right?) and it's up to you to figure out whether such acts are warranted within the narrative.  For example, do we put the conservative, chivalrous Harrowmont in power, or the progressive, magnificent bastard Bhelen?  One action maybe considered the "evil" option, but that depends on whether we focus on their *character* or their *political agenda.* That's why I feel that demanding an evil option for a game like Dragon Age seems meaningless.

[PinkDiamondstl]

Please let me be evil? Evil?? Not in my games please...

[TCBC_Freak]

Sacred_Fantasy wrote...

TCBC_Freak wrote...

So, you want to play the bad guy? If I am to understand you this is what you want. To be the antagonist, the exact opposite of the protagonist. This is why some people felt that the Renegade Shepard was not "realistic" because they couldn't get it straight that he wasn't evil, just kind of a a*hole but he still wanted to stop the reapers who were evil. Being evil means you are, by definition, not the hero and thus not the main character in a STORY, which must have a hero and a villain or it isn't a story, it's just an anecdote and unworthy of a my $60.

So, Shepard is not the hero and the main character in Mass Effect when he contrrol the reapers by becoming the reapers himself? I know it's suck but that's what happen in BioWare story.

TCBC_Freak wrote...

On a bit of a side note, as I personally don't think this is all you want but it comes up a bit: Games that let you kill randoms (like Skyrim, Fallout, GTA, Fable, Infamous, and Dishonored {which I'll note also lets you go trough the whole game without killing anyone if you want as well} to name a few) do it for one of two reason; they either want to make the most real world possible kind of like a simulated reality and in the real world you could kill anyone you want, or they do it because even if you get bored with the "story" you might still put in the game to waste time just running random people over (I'm looking at you GTA).

Yeah, and I'm glad they attempt to do so. Virtual reality is a way to the future gaming now, especially with the introduction of  3D Virtual Reality where anything is possible.

TCBC_Freak wrote...


Dragon Age is a fantasy game and it's about story; if you get bored then they've failed at their job.

They fail their job horribly with DA 2, to me. But then again they failed their job with Lady Aribeth in Neverwinter Nights, so I'm not really surprised with their boring story. Hopefully, DA 3 will be 100x better than ME 2  in term of story, since they wanted so much to copy ME 2's formula, which resulted the changes in direction for DA 2. 

TCBC_Freak wrote...

So just out of curiosity. Which of the following is the type of evil you think would make the game more fun to play out?
Evil:
1. morally wrong or bad; immoral; wicked: "evil deeds; an evil life."
2. harmful; injurious.
3. characterized or accompanied by misfortune or suffering; unfortunate; disastrous: "to be fallen on evil days."
4. due to actual or imputed bad conduct or character: "an evil reputation."
5. marked by anger, irritability, irascibility, etc.: "He is known for his evil disposition."

Does it matter? Evil character doesn't need to explain his motive and reason. He can be selfish or sturggling for survival in conditions that required him to act, "wicked" for a choice that he's willing to take for the good of others and people will oppose him anyway. 

1. Controling the reapers isn't the "evil" option, there is no evil option at the end of Mass Effect nor is there a good, there are three optin that all have good and bad to them, none are evil.
2. No commint, that's fine if you enjoy that, killing random people can be diverting but it rarely adds to the story.
3. No comment, we agree that if the story is so boring you decide to kill people for kicks then they have failed.
4. I just asked out of honest couriosity. But you point out why playing an evil cahracter doesn't work. He doesn't need to explain what he's doing and in fact there is no explination so there is no story to explore about what he's doing and why, it is random and therefore impossible to really predict and program for. If he does something for the good of anyone other than himself it isn't evil, it's at worst stupid or foolish of him but not evil. Being selfish or acting wicked are not always the same as evil. It hinges on motivations which a truely evil person is hard to explain for.

[The Teyrn of Whatever]

I'd like to have opportunities to play with choices that cover the full range of D&D alignments from Lawful Good to Chaotic Evil. I'm not saying it would apply to every situation or every time the dialogue wheel pops up, but give us some opportunities.

It would be cool to be able to do something that is either evil but within the structure and order of the law OR be able to do something evil that sows chaos and tears at the fabric of social order and decency.

Modifié par The Teryn of Whatever, 05 décembre 2012 - 12:51 .

[The Teyrn of Whatever]

TCBC_Freak wrote...

Sacred_Fantasy wrote...

TCBC_Freak wrote...

So, you want to play the bad guy? If I am to understand you this is what you want. To be the antagonist, the exact opposite of the protagonist. This is why some people felt that the Renegade Shepard was not "realistic" because they couldn't get it straight that he wasn't evil, just kind of a a*hole but he still wanted to stop the reapers who were evil. Being evil means you are, by definition, not the hero and thus not the main character in a STORY, which must have a hero and a villain or it isn't a story, it's just an anecdote and unworthy of a my $60.

So, Shepard is not the hero and the main character in Mass Effect when he contrrol the reapers by becoming the reapers himself? I know it's suck but that's what happen in BioWare story.

TCBC_Freak wrote...

On a bit of a side note, as I personally don't think this is all you want but it comes up a bit: Games that let you kill randoms (like Skyrim, Fallout, GTA, Fable, Infamous, and Dishonored {which I'll note also lets you go trough the whole game without killing anyone if you want as well} to name a few) do it for one of two reason; they either want to make the most real world possible kind of like a simulated reality and in the real world you could kill anyone you want, or they do it because even if you get bored with the "story" you might still put in the game to waste time just running random people over (I'm looking at you GTA).

Yeah, and I'm glad they attempt to do so. Virtual reality is a way to the future gaming now, especially with the introduction of  3D Virtual Reality where anything is possible.

TCBC_Freak wrote...


Dragon Age is a fantasy game and it's about story; if you get bored then they've failed at their job.

They fail their job horribly with DA 2, to me. But then again they failed their job with Lady Aribeth in Neverwinter Nights, so I'm not really surprised with their boring story. Hopefully, DA 3 will be 100x better than ME 2  in term of story, since they wanted so much to copy ME 2's formula, which resulted the changes in direction for DA 2. 

TCBC_Freak wrote...

So just out of curiosity. Which of the following is the type of evil you think would make the game more fun to play out?
Evil:
1. morally wrong or bad; immoral; wicked: "evil deeds; an evil life."
2. harmful; injurious.
3. characterized or accompanied by misfortune or suffering; unfortunate; disastrous: "to be fallen on evil days."
4. due to actual or imputed bad conduct or character: "an evil reputation."
5. marked by anger, irritability, irascibility, etc.: "He is known for his evil disposition."

Does it matter? Evil character doesn't need to explain his motive and reason. He can be selfish or sturggling for survival in conditions that required him to act, "wicked" for a choice that he's willing to take for the good of others and people will oppose him anyway. 

1. Controling the reapers isn't the "evil" option, there is no evil option at the end of Mass Effect nor is there a good, there are three optin that all have good and bad to them, none are evil.
2. No commint, that's fine if you enjoy that, killing random people can be diverting but it rarely adds to the story.
3. No comment, we agree that if the story is so boring you decide to kill people for kicks then they have failed.
4. I just asked out of honest couriosity. But you point out why playing an evil cahracter doesn't work. He doesn't need to explain what he's doing and in fact there is no explination so there is no story to explore about what he's doing and why, it is random and therefore impossible to really predict and program for. If he does something for the good of anyone other than himself it isn't evil, it's at worst stupid or foolish of him but not evil. Being selfish or acting wicked are not always the same as evil. It hinges on motivations which a truely evil person is hard to explain for.

I agree with you TCBC_Freak. Control isn't evil. None of the options are inherently evil or good. They all have the potential to do the galaxy harm but can also provide benefits in both the short and long-term, if the implications of our actions as shown in the Extended Cut epilogues are anything to go by. Mass Effect was never about simplistic notions of good :innocent: and evil:devil:.

There was plenty of gray and grey morality even when it wasn't immediately obvious that this was what we were being presented with. In ME 1 in a conversation with Tali, when learning about the Geth Rebellion, Shepard could choose to tell Tali that the uprising served the Quarians right. It wasn't until the second game and meeting Legion and the conversation which followed that the Commander could learn that the Geth were more complex than we initially thought. ME 3 brought this full circle, showing that both sides were right in certain ways and wrong in others.

Sacred_Fantasy, the antagonist can also mean the villain of the story, someone at odds with the main character or characters. The protagonist of a story or game can be a thoroughly reprehensible individual, dastardly and evil in just about every way imaginable and still be the protagonist. The antagonist to such a character could be a paladin in the shiniest armor in existence and still be considered the antagonist in the story. It's not good to always think in dualistic terms. Shades of grey and variations on themes exist, both in RL and in fiction.

Modifié par The Teryn of Whatever, 05 décembre 2012 - 01:02 .

[The Teyrn of Whatever]

PinkDiamondstl wrote...

Please let me be evil? Evil?? Not in my games please...

Would the option being there hurt you or your sensibilities? As long as we're not railroaded into being evil, I don't mind having the choice. I don't want to be forced to play a morally upstanding character in every single one of my plathroughs either. Sometimes it's fun not to play the hero's role...

Modifié par The Teryn of Whatever, 05 décembre 2012 - 01:05 .

[Giantdeathrobot]

Dragon Age and ME3 allowed you to be one hell of a callous bastard, especially Origins. Not be the villain, because well that would require rewriting he story. That WAS one of the things I liked about TOR, you could be laughably evil and screw people over for no good reason. That was fun sometimes. But the game still had only one storyline, only one choice at the end made you the evil guy.

[Dagr88]

Among many types of evil the most enjoyable for me is "Puppet master". You know, some information that's available only to your PC from the 3rd party. And by keeping it to yourself and silencing everyone who might bring it up (NPC, middle game boss or even an ally/companion if s/he discovers it very close to the end game so there would be less middle game rewriting a.k.a it's a big part of the plot) or bribing them if NPC/companion is morally flexible enough.

As a reward you might get...using DA:O terminology: Loghain/army/a bit different epilogue/satisfaction from getting rid off a companion that you didn't like.

OR if you're a goody two shoes you might just spill the beans and get... I don't know... "Tnx for telling me" sex.

PS: Didn't read the whole post, so sorry if I'm repeating someone else's idea.

Modifié par Dagr88, 05 décembre 2012 - 02:59 .

[NasreddinHodja]

Giantdeathrobot wrote...

Dragon Age and ME3 allowed you to be one hell of a callous bastard, especially Origins. Not be the villain, because well that would require rewriting he story. That WAS one of the things I liked about TOR, you could be laughably evil and screw people over for no good reason. That was fun sometimes. But the game still had only one storyline, only one choice at the end made you the evil guy.

Agreed.  The kind of narrative that Dragon Age and Mass Effect has isn't really conducive for the laughably-evil kind of PC.  There's a time and place for it, but I don't believe the Dragon Age universe is it.