57 réponses à ce sujet

[Ieldra]

In recent games, I have repeatedly made the following observation:

My protagonist meets a character. I think "this one is interesting". Maybe I even feel my protagonist is attracted to him or her. And then, through the story, some character development happens and the formerly interesting character becomes boring or annoyingly stereotypical.

Well, such things happen. However, if this character is an LI, and I imagined my protagonist was attracted to her (it's almost always a woman, this tends not to happen to males) because of traits that are later taken away, I feel betrayed. In particular, I feel betrayed because I like badass women with an edge, a grey morality and an element of ruthlessness who emphatically do not conform to any classically good archetype, and those are most often turned into stereotypical good gals in the end.

That's why I say that DA needs more Morrigans. It's not that she didn't have traits I disliked. She had. But all in all, she came close to a favorite archetype, and she never changed herself for love or anything else and she never compromised her goals for the Warden. I recall when I played DAO with my first male Warden and came to the end when Morrigan said she would go and follow her own path, that I admired her for it, and I did not mind at all how it ended, because there was hope for the future.

Having said that, DAO did well with the other LI characters as well. With Leliana and Alistair, there was potential for character development but you could influence it somewhat. I don't really like the idea that my protagonist has a personality-changing influence on their companions but it's better than a forced character development into a direction I hate.

To summarize: when I come to like a character, I usually like them because of the traits they come with at the time. I do not want to change them into something else, or see them change in fundamental ways, and if they're LIs and it's inevitable that they change, I want to influence the direction in order to minimize the damage. 

Character development for NPCs should be used with care in games.

Now I'd like to know how others think about this.

Modifié par Ieldra2, 29 mai 2013 - 12:43 .

[brushyourteeth]

So, is it that you want companions whose points of view aren't malleable to the protagonist's opinions? Or is it just that you want the developers to *write better*? It sounds like what you're saying is "I don't want companions to change, but if they change I want to be able to change them the way I want them to change."

I can kind of see where you're coming from, though I think I'd argue that every DA:O companion (except for maybe Wynne or even Leliana) was deeply changed by their friendship with the Warden (if a friendship in fact happened). In DAII, I thought that Aveline was the most surprisingly deep companion in the game (I wasn't expecting much out of her from the description - more the fool me, huh?) and she, Varric, and Bethany didn't seem to be super concerned with what Hawke thought at least most of the time. It didn't really bother me that some characters seemed predictable or unlikeable to me, because that's realistic. And I like realistic. If anything, I was disappointed that I only had the options to agree with them, laugh at them, or be a jerk to them. I felt like on the rivalry path it kind of gave the illusion that I was a big huge jerk that bullied my friends into letting me make their most important life decisions for them (and even define their self-perceptions, which is way too much control).

But Mr. Gaider has been saying that the friendship/rivalry system won't be coming back for DA:I, so the two-track system of proving that we have an influence will kind of be out of the picture. I think maybe some of what you experienced might have been caused by the excitement or pressure the developers felt about "okay, we have this cool mechanic -- best prove that we know how to use it."

[Ieldra]

Basically, my wishes can be summarized as follows:

(1) If I encounter a character interesting enough to invest emotions in them, I want them to *stay* interesting and not become boring. Standards differ of course, but developing from a grey to a white archetype usually means they become less interesting.

(2) In a romance, I don't want to feel as if the protagonist is changing the character they're romantically involved with. That's not how things should work, and it makes the character in question subordinate and if they had been an equal before, they usually won't be that any more. I don't mind having an influence on character development as the player, but it's hard to separate that from the protagonist's influence.

(3) I have noticed that there is a gender stereotype - men are allowed to remain "grey", women usually aren't. I want more equality in this.

Modifié par Ieldra2, 29 mai 2013 - 01:46 .

[Rawgrim]

Isabela was kind of grey, i think.

[Ieldra]

Rawgrim wrote...
Isabela was kind of grey, i think.

Yes....but did she stay that way? That's at least debatable.

[Hazegurl]

That's why I would love to have an enemy LI. Someone with goals separate from the protagonist that offer more of a challenge. I don't want to play therapist for my LI to help him "fix" himself.

[Ieldra]

Hazegurl wrote...
That's why I would love to have an enemy LI. Someone with goals separate from the protagonist that offer more of a challenge. I don't want to play therapist for my LI to help him "fix" himself.

Enemy LIs are most prone to the hated "softening" mechanic I described, particularly if they're women. Also, if they're enemies, they almost need to change their goals at some time, right?

I'd rather have a grey LI as an ally from the start, or starting out a neutral party. That way there's less motivation for changing them.

[Vilegrim]

Ieldra2 wrote...

Hazegurl wrote...
That's why I would love to have an enemy LI. Someone with goals separate from the protagonist that offer more of a challenge. I don't want to play therapist for my LI to help him "fix" himself.

Enemy LIs are most prone to the hated "softening" mechanic I described, particularly if they're women. Also, if they're enemies, they almost need to change their goals at some time, right?

I'd rather have a grey LI as an ally from the start, or starting out a neutral party. That way there's less motivation for changing them.

For a good example of 'enemy' love interest, see Gemmels Skillgannon the damned. The women he loves (and who loves him) has for political reasons to at least try to have him killed, every time he gets involved in her plans.  The woman Jianna  loves him,  Queen Jianna can not, if you like Gemmels style (and I do) it is one of his better series, he does a good job of making both Skilgannon and Jianna believable, and to an extent sympathetic, both are flawed, both are grey (Skilgannon more so than Jianna, he at least seeks to make amends, she is a tyrant and considers the other options worse, and may have a point) 

[LolaLei]

OP, I think I see where you're coming from.

I agree that the companions shouldn't "change" to suit the players needs, I was quite pleased to discover that Anders will still blow up the Chantry regardless of how you treat him, sure it was harsh, but I liked that "love/friendship" didn't save/heal/change him.

[JamieCOTC]

Ieldra2 wrote...

Rawgrim wrote...
Isabela was kind of grey, i think.

Yes....but did she stay that way? That's at least debatable.

Yes, she remains grey, perhaps a lighter shade of grey, but grey nonetheless. If romanced she will still sleep w/ Zevran. She's still all about coin and sailing off away from Kirkwall at some point remaining free at almost any cost. She won't become jealous if Hawke romances Tallis in MotA. You can also have Isabella in a secondary romance while romancing another character. It doesn't lead anywhere, but it is there. The only thing that significantly changes about Isabella is that she brings back the Qunari book and even then she'll still run off for good if the player doesn't do her quest first or tells her to give it back the Qunari. Isabella remains Isabella.

[Cainhurst Crow]

I am of mixed opinion on the matter, because I did feel morrigan did change with the warden befriending or becoming a love interest to her. Also I do enjoy characters changing over time and with interactions, mainly because from my own experience people tend to do that over time when they meet, get to know someone, and than become close to them. You start picking up on traits or habits and adjusting to those, and vice versa. If anything, I think the PC character shoul change along with the LI in order to make it more realistic.

I digress though, I think I'm just not seeing the problem.

[FINE HERE]

Ieldra2 wrote...

(2) In a romance, I don't want to feel as if the protagonist is changing the character they're romantically involved with. That's not how things should work, and it makes the character in question subordinate and if they had been an equal before, they usually won't be that any more. I don't mind having an influence on character development as the player, but it's hard to separate that from the protagonist's influence. 

Um... come again? People sometimes do change when they fall in love, and it has nothing to do with being 'subordinate' or 'unequal' to their partners. Before my cousin met his wife, he was a complete macho jerk, made stupid jerks all the time and complained a hell of a lot. Now, he looks like he's dad material. He's so nice now; he still acts like himself, but in a nice way.

I don't think it makes a character weak because they react to the PC and want to do something for them out of love. That's a sign of commitment. I'm not saying they should change every little thing about themselves, that's too much. But for the character to change a little, so it's at least recognizable, is fine.

I like that characters change as you romance them. It's a sign of character-development and a reaction to the flirting I've done in game. Love is a two-way thing, it shouldn't be just the PC just putting in work for the relationship.

[Fast Jimmy]

Cthulhu42 wrote...

I find this is much more of an issue with ME than DA. I'm looking at you Mordin; no, you didn't "make a mistake".

Mordin for LI? That's what I'm hearing here. 

[Boycott Bioware]

I think if want to make more unique character, throw away the color...like Sten...he's not, white, black, grey, yellow, red, green....Sten is Sten, he have his own morality, he have his belief, you agree with him and his religion/philosophy or not, that is the matter

The problem with grey is you must compare it with white and black, then you see the grey. But Sten not belong to any color, you can't compare it with white or black, and you cannot compare with grey either. The Qun is a religion Sten believe in and stay true to it. Your judgement about his religion is irrelevent, no matter you like it or not like it, the Qun is neither good or evil or in between, black or white or even grey. There is no moral compass to judge Sten

What i mean is, most of grey characters in Bioware are actually in the middle of two extremes, justifying the good, justifying the bad or justifying don't want to involve.

What make Sten unique is justification is not needed, he just follow what he believe in his religion as a person who follow any philosophy or belief system. We may call Qun as evil and wrong, what we say is irrelevant, because it is in our own judgment and view about him and his religion.

But with the so called grey characters we can outright saying the thing is wrong or right because the two extremes are clear as a sky in the afternoon

Example, the Jedi and the Sith in Star Wars are extremists, even Jolee Bindo the grey Jedi is an extremist by taking stand for not taking side. There's three faction to compare with, light, dark and grey.

The Grey Warden represent another extremist, another faction of extremist. We can outrisght saying "you do wrong" no matter what justification they give, the thing still wrong, it doesn't make it right. Doing evil for good is an extremist view.

But Sten following his religious code can't be called good, evil or grey, because there is nothing to be made comparison with other than his religion and his view about his own religion.

edit : I vote Sten as LI in DA3

Modifié par Qistina, 29 mai 2013 - 06:52 .

[David7204]

If you choose the Paragon dialogue options on Mordin's loyalty mission, it is incredibly clear that has harbors very serious regrets over what he did.

If you picked the Renegade options, then it's probably much more jarring. But I don't really see much of a solution to that.

Modifié par David7204, 29 mai 2013 - 06:48 .

[David7204]

Qistina wrote...

blah blah blah...

There's no such thing. A comparison will always exist. Players will always compare the morality of a character to their own. And giving a character completely alien morality just for the purposes of being alien would likely just come off the players as pointless and stupid. Morals are more than just flavors like ice cream. They're based on reasoning, and that reasoning is going to hold true for any intelligence life. Having companions ignore that would just make them incredibly unlikeable.

Modifié par David7204, 29 mai 2013 - 06:54 .

[Boycott Bioware]

There's no such thing as there not being a comparison. A comparison will always exist. Players will always compare the morality of a character to their own.

You want to compare Sten the Qunari with what? Yourself? Your morality? Your religion? Your belief?

If you say him wrong, how are you so sure you are right?

Sten born in a society of Qun, you (in DA world) born in the society of Andrasterians, Sten can say it is you and your religion is wrong, not him.

What make you right?

Modifié par Qistina, 29 mai 2013 - 06:58 .

[David7204]

I can come up with a completely alien morality in 5 seconds. Watch.

"Anyone who enjoys waffles is a heathen who needs to die. Cauliflower, however, absolves the eater of any sins."

Boom. I've got a strict moral code, and it's totally alien. And in accordance with my code, I'm going to go shoot up a Waffle House.

What would you think about that?

Modifié par David7204, 29 mai 2013 - 07:02 .

[DatOneFanboy]

... But i like leliana erhmygurd

[Nole]

I never liked Morrigan to be honest. She's just another Mary Sue in my opinion.

[Boycott Bioware]

I can come up with a completely alien morality in 5 seconds. Watch.

"Anyone who enjoys waffles is a heathen who needs to die. Cauliflower, however, absolves the eater of any sins."

Boom. I've got a strict moral code, and it's totally alien. And in accordance with my code, I'm going to go shoot up a Waffle House.

What would you think about that?

See, no one can say that you are wrong, because it is your moral code vs anyone moral code.

Only someone who is following your moral code can judge you wrong or right, because it is a matter of interpretation.

Example...no one can say i am wrong in killing all bunnies in the world because i believe that all bunnies must be killed or else they eat all carrots in the world, as according to the code in my interpretation, all bunnies must be killed

only my sisterhood can say i am right or wrong in following my code, if they say i am right then i am right, if they say i am wrong then i am wrong. No one else can judge me because no one know what the code is.Anyone could label me evil because killing all the bunnies i see, but what do they know about bunnies and the code?

Modifié par Qistina, 29 mai 2013 - 07:16 .

[Wozearly]

Qistina wrote...

Sten is Sten, he have his own morality, he have his belief, you agree with him and his religion/philosophy or not, that is the matter...there is no moral compass to judge Sten

But with the so called grey characters we can outright the thing is wrong or right because the two extremes are clear as a sky in the afternoon

Example, the Jedi and the Sith in Star Wars are extremists, even Jolee Bindo the grey Jedi is an extremist by taking stand for not taking side. There's three faction to compare with, light, dark and grey.

The Grey Warden represent another extremist, another faction of extremist. We can outrisght saying "you do wrong" no matter what justification they give, the thing still wrong, it doesn't make it right. Doing evil for good is an extremist view.

Eerily enough, I'd say that there is a moral compass to judge Sten with - the moral compass of the Qun. Which he sticks to without compromise.

Its just somewhat distant from the moral compass applied to Ferelden and, arguably, to standardised 'Western' moral compasses. There's something of the Zoroastrian about him: "In Zoroastrian tradition, life is a temporary state in which a mortal is expected to actively participate in the continuing battle between truth and falsehood."

If you wanted to boil down Sten's moral code, it would be along the lines of "Pursue the greater good through the most expedient path, but at all times retain your honour and honesty. Your path has been set for you, and its your duty to follow it to the best of your ability. Compassion is an irrelevant distraction, as is helping others when it is not directly beneficial to your goal.

Sten's moral compass and beliefs never change - although what I'd argue does change is his perception of the value brought by the Ferelden / Grey Warden moral compass, particularly if you go out of your way to help him when it wasn't necessary to your cause. He doesn't change his mind, but it becomes clear that he respects you and your views even if they differ.

Sten's character development was a brilliant piece of writing.

On the Jolee note, I wouldn't call him an extremist, just a generally passive grey-to-light character. He certainly didn't refuse to get involved if your character fell openly to the dark side...but that he believes in not trying to make other people's minds up for them, even if he has views on their actions, was an interesting twist.

Completely the opposite of the grey-to-dark creation that was Kreia, who was absolutely out to make other people's minds up for them in a manipulative fashion, with the arguable exception of the Exile who she effectively tried to mentor into understanding and agreeing with her way of thinking of his/her own accord. Her frustration at any point when this doesn't happen is self-evident.


On the OP's point about changing characters, the hardening mechanic of DA:O was a good compromise point for giving the opportunity to influence how a couple of companions (and potential LIs) dealt with their own crisis of conscience. They didn't do it because they loved the player, and nor did it fundamentally change who they were (indeed, if anything, it added rough edges rather than smoothing them away).

Taking Anders as an example of the opposite, what annoyed me wasn't that you couldn't influence him out of blowing the Chantry to bits, but that with high rivalry you couldn't force a more confrontational moment and that as high friendship you couldn't well, you know, actually support him in his endeavour.

To be honest, I don't think Bioware has a problem with too few grey characters, or not enough 'good' grey characters, or too many LIs that change who they are outside of showing a slightly different side of their personality to close friends / lovers. That just helps make them feel a bit less 2-dimensional.

Modifié par Wozearly, 29 mai 2013 - 07:18 .