134 réponses à ce sujet

[llandwynwyn]

Ieldra2 wrote...

I implore you, DA team, don't overuse the "driven insane by magic (or destructive mind control)" EXCUSE - and yes, it is an excuse for making people behave erratically and attacking you just because, making it necessary to put them down without mercy, and removing the necessity of thinking about realistic motivations.

It's too late for that.

[David7204]

In Exile wrote...

That makes them stupid enemies. You'll just see threads about making enemies intelligent or not having the plot railroad you into not being able to explain yourself well. It's like the issue with the Council and Alliance in ME2.

Not really. No amount of 'explaining' would justify preparations for a galactic invasion on the evidence available. That's just players being silly.

[MisterJB]

Mykel54 wrote...

The problem with removing something like red templars from the game is that then: what templars do you fight? Say that i play as a pro-templar inquisitor, so because i support them, i should not fight any templar npc at all? And if i am a bloodmage inquisitor, then i guess i should not encounter any bloodmage npcs, because we are colleagues?

The purpose of these "crazed enemies" is to give all players, no exception, the same enemies to fight. You can fight beasts, daemons, dragons etc. but the humanoid enemies are more complicated. You can´t ask an inquisitor pro-mage to just go a kill a bunch of apostates (see how well that worked in DA2). So the easiest solution is to make those enemies totally crazy or evil, so that no ones think twice while butchering them. I don´t think bioware can afford to make all the npcs you kill be different depending on your character´s outlook on the world, most of them must be the same for all players (ex. loghain´s men in DAO, who opposed the warden).

I do agree that the insane npcs is cheap writing, and that it would be better if the enemy npcs had better motivations to stop the inquisitor. Maybe they don´t trust him and he wants to take over their lands, or they are oblivious to the real threat of the veil breach and refuse to follow you. I think making them insane is a cheap plot device, but as long as most enemies do not fit that mould i don´t have a problem with some enemies being depicted as insane.

DA2, surprisingly, presented the solution to your dillema. In a Pro-Templar playthrough, you were sent with two grups of templars who answered to two different high-raking templars to hunt down a group of blood mages. Once you discovered and killed them, you realize their families had been helping them.
One group of templars wants to kill these as well and the other wants to spare them. Hawke must choose which group to support which leads to him fighting the other.

Just like there are different fraternities amongst the mages who sput different ideologies, I expect there would be as many different types of templars as there are people. It wouldn't be hard to write situations where one must come into conflict without making the enemies being insane horrors.

And if you must absolutely have a faction of humanoids to fight, then just use Tevinter which is universally hated.

[Ieldra]

hhh89 wrote...
A thing that should be considered is that Meredith didn't became crazy right away; it took three years, becoming more paranoid during the years.
What I mean that even this faction (which i don't want to rapresent the whole templar side) could be....not completely crazy, maybe.

That it took a long time doesn't change the narrative and thematic impact of the end result. Meredith was a great character once. Then came red lyrium.

Can't we have worthy opponents any more, opponents we can respect...and still need to fight?

[MisanthropePrime]

I'd trade insane enemies for insane merchants.

[deuce985]

Gotta love the assumptions in these threads. As if anyone has a clue as to where the plot will actually go.

[MisterJB]

deuce985 wrote...

Gotta love the assumptions in these threads. As if anyone has a clue as to where the plot will actually go.

It is where the plot has gone to in the last two Bioware games and thus, I think there is some basis for the fear that history is about to repeat itself.

Modifié par MisterJB, 01 septembre 2013 - 08:55 .

[Ieldra]

deuce985 wrote...
Gotta love the assumptions in these threads. As if anyone has a clue as to where the plot will actually go.

I do not know. It's quite possible we'll only see these "red templars" rarely, but the similarity to "indoctrinated Cerberus" is noticeable - a faction driven insane by some magic or other in order to become monsters we can kill without the need to think about it. 

@MisterJB:
Exactly.

Modifié par Ieldra2, 01 septembre 2013 - 08:56 .

[David7204]

That's kind of a necessity in combat video games. They all have you killing people.

Whether the story has you thinking about them or not, you're still going to be killing them. And what's worse if the player decides they don't want to be mowing down mooks but the game 'forces' them to anyway.

So I would suggest you accept a very significant amount of brainless mooks of some type as a given. Whether they be insane or bandits or something else.

Modifié par David7204, 01 septembre 2013 - 08:58 .

[MisanthropePrime]

David7204 wrote...

That's kind of a necessity in combat video games. They all have you killing people.

Well you could be insane. Like Hotline Miami.

[The dead fish]

Well, the templars are without Lyrium. For sure, there will be many insane folks. :/

After, I agree that there shouldn't be only insane people. But I'm sure we will see sane people too.

Modifié par Sylvianus, 01 septembre 2013 - 09:00 .

[AresKeith]

David7204 wrote...

That's kind of a necessity in combat video games. They all have you killing people.

Which is where the demons coming in helps

[The Elder King]

Ieldra2 wrote...

hhh89 wrote...
A thing that should be considered is that Meredith didn't became crazy right away; it took three years, becoming more paranoid during the years.
What I mean that even this faction (which i don't want to rapresent the whole templar side) could be....not completely crazy, maybe.

That it took a long time doesn't change the narrative and thematic impact of the end result. Meredith was a great character once. Then came red lyrium.

Can't we have worthy opponents any more, opponents we can respect...and still need to fight?

I'm not saying that we shouldn't have worthy opponents. Just that the crazy/evil one might not be completely crazy/evil.

[Mikoto8472]

I kinda agree. It'd be nice to see a sane, well-reasoned opponent.

An insane opponent that just does stupid things because s/he insane doesn't make for much of an enemy. Take Meredith for example. At the end of the game after Anders did his thing I felt nothing but a vague sense of pity when I fought Meredith. This woman didn't deserve my anger or hatred.

She didn't really deserve my blade either. All I'd have wanted to do was disarm her and cart her off to a healer like I did with Bartrand. There's no satisfaction killing someone who doesn't know what's real and what isn't.

[Brodoteau]

Can I just point out that DA2 had plenty of insane enemies (that weren't caused by red lyrium). Every street gang for instance featured people that 1. Attacked a heavily armed group of passerbys (not to mention that in the 3rd act they attacked the bloody Champion of Kirkwall) 2. Fought to the very end despite Hawke killing dozens of their companions.

Red lyrium is an improvement over wave mechanics.

[Rorschachinstein]

Something about killing perfectly normal people with families and stuff. Even in a fantasy world, it still feels hard to call yourself the good guy

[MisterJB]

Ieldra2 wrote...
I do not know. It's quite possible we'll only see these "red templars" rarely,

I doubt it. In the demo, your soldier said "It's Red Templars" which implies they are a known enemy and, according to an user in another thread, one of the devs said they were "a longterm enemy".
If true,they'll probrably be a major faction we'll spend most of the game fighting.

Modifié par MisterJB, 01 septembre 2013 - 09:10 .

[Ziggeh]

In Exile wrote...

That makes them stupid enemies. You'll just see threads about making enemies intelligent or not having the plot railroad you into not being able to explain yourself well. It's like the issue with the Council and Alliance in ME2.

Ah yes, "demons".

[Genshie]

Reznore57 wrote...

DooomCookie wrote...

Officially known as WoW syndrome.

1. All raid bosses are insane.
2. All morally grey characters will someday be raid bosses.
3. Usually by going insane.

You forget everyone you killed , even beheaded , will one day come back from the dead .

And then those special days/events where they come back for no reason whatsoever so you can ransack their corspe once you kill them over and over. Cause YAAAAY PHAT LOOTZ.

Modifié par Genshie, 01 septembre 2013 - 09:17 .

[David7204]

Do know what mooks are?

They're just the minions that provide the bulk of the combat in fiction. It doesn't matter what their motivation is. Mooks are still mooks. Insane mooks are still mooks. And nearly all combat video games have mooks.

[Genshie]

David7204 wrote...

Do know what mooks are?

They're just the minions that provide the bulk of the combat in fiction. It doesn't matter what their motivation is. Mooks are still mooks. Insane mooks are still mooks. And nearly all combat video games have mooks.

 I would even go as far to say that every video game regardless of genre has mooks of some sort.

[David7204]

Well, puzzles games don't. Racing games don't. Construction and management games don't.