164 réponses à ce sujet

[AutumnWitch]

"truly evil" is "truly subjective"

[Estelindis]

almostinsane99 wrote...

Having a Tevinter Blood Mage sacrifice a bunch of captured elves for a boost in Constitution seems pretty evil to me.

Yes, it's deeply evil.  However, it occurs in the context of trying to stop the Blight.  I don't think that justifies it, but one could imagine someone attempting to justify it by claiming that they need every edge to fight the battle that will save many more people than just these elves.  Wardens have turned to blood magic before, presumably in service of their greater cause.  

No matter how horrible DA:O's Warden protagonist is, they have no choice but to oppose the Blight.  That overall purpose is, at worst, a morally neutral act of self-preservation.  The closest chance they get to deviate from the mandate of the Grey Wardens is the choice offered by Morrigan, which might redeem the soul of the archdemon or do any one of a number of other things.  

[Eleinehmm]

Magehand2278 wrote...

 BW correct me if I am wrong but in the DA franchise, have
you ever created a truly evil protagonist?  I was just in the thread where the host was
asking for you to kill NPC, whether you should or should not, agree or disagree
should be directed and answered in that thread. But the fact that it wasn’t even
an option makes me wonder if there was ever an opportunity for an evil
protagonist to begin with. I know you could make some questionable choices and
even an option to have the “evil guy” dialogue but none of that makes you truly
evil or even a bad guy. It just makes you an individual with an alternative
point of view.

I am also concerned that the only time the player gets to
confirm whether he/she is good or bad, is not through the quests he/she goes on
but the dialogue option. Which isn’t a very good indicator if you ask me
because at in DA2, regardless of which dialogue option you choose you ended up
with the same result and I can’t remember if it was the same for DAO (plus admittedly
I never choose the evil dialogue option in that game).

The objective of this thread is to firstly confirm my hypothesis
that the main character in the DA franchise was never given the option to be truly
evil guy and if you’ll agree with me on that,  find out if you’ll would
like that option in the next game, if that is even a possibility at this late
stage of development. 

I don't believe that there are people who think they are evil.
As for character who acted in a what I would call "morally evil" way, - sure.

The gent on my avatar is called Corvin, he had always had troubles connecting with people, I would guess because of lack of early life connections due to being send to the circle.  He is mildly irritated by people, has double standards when it comes to his own weaknesses as opposed to the weaknesses of others (He clashed with Alistair a lot, found Wynne intolerable, despised the whole religion, not because of the general moral stance, but because he felt it oppressed him as a mage, hated the circle and I guess hated himself for caring a little bit from time to time.
He killed a lot of good people, held a lot of nasty opinions, insulted people he perceived as weak and was somewhat self-destructive.
What is evil enough ? Drinking blood of Arl Eamon and joining the Darkspawn?

Modifié par Eleinehmm, 11 novembre 2013 - 08:46 .

[Icy Magebane]

Eleinehmm wrote...

I don't believe that there are people who think they are evil.
As for character who acted in a what I would call "morally evil" way, - sure.

The gent on my avatar is called Corvin, he has always had troubles connecting with people, I would guess because of lack of early life connections due to being send to the circle.  He is mildly irritated by people, has double standards when it comes to his own weaknesses as opposed to the weaknesses of others (He clashed with Alistair a lot, found Wynne intolerable, despised the whole religion, not because of the general moral stance, but because he felt it oppressed him as a mage, hated the circle and I guess hated himself for caring a little bit from time to time.
He killed a lot of good people, held a lot of nasty opinions, insulted people he perceived as weak and was somewhat self-destructive.
What is evil enough ? Drinking blood of Arl Eamon and joining the Darkspawn?

Well, I hate to disprove a person so thoroughly, but when playing certain games, I sometimes believe that I am an evil person doing evil things.  Not everyone tries to justify their behavior...

[Eleinehmm]

Icy Magebane wrote...

Eleinehmm wrote...

I don't believe that there are people who think they are evil.
As for character who acted in a what I would call "morally evil" way, - sure.

The gent on my avatar is called Corvin, he has always had troubles connecting with people, I would guess because of lack of early life connections due to being send to the circle.  He is mildly irritated by people, has double standards when it comes to his own weaknesses as opposed to the weaknesses of others (He clashed with Alistair a lot, found Wynne intolerable, despised the whole religion, not because of the general moral stance, but because he felt it oppressed him as a mage, hated the circle and I guess hated himself for caring a little bit from time to time.
He killed a lot of good people, held a lot of nasty opinions, insulted people he perceived as weak and was somewhat self-destructive.
What is evil enough ? Drinking blood of Arl Eamon and joining the Darkspawn?

Well, I hate to disprove a person so thoroughly, but when playing certain games, I sometimes believe that I am an evil person doing evil things.  Not everyone tries to justify their behavior...

Hmm, all right ? So why is your character doing Evil things ?  For the pure evil-lolz  (You as a player might, but a character, - only if he is crazy) ? All other things would be yes I think it's evil but the alternatives are worse(still a justification)/it's not evil I am being pragmatic/good&evil are subjective so I don't care about it etc....

Modifié par Eleinehmm, 11 novembre 2013 - 08:53 .

[Icy Magebane]

Eleinehmm wrote...

Icy Magebane wrote...

Well, I hate to disprove a person so thoroughly, but when playing certain games, I sometimes believe that I am an evil person doing evil things.  Not everyone tries to justify their behavior...

Hmm, all right ? So why is your character doing Evil things ?  For the pure evil-lolz  (You as a player might, but a character, - only if he is crazy) ? All other things would be yes I think it's evil but the alternatives are worse(still a justification)/it's not evil.

The mindset of pure evil does not seek to compare actions or consequences.  The action in and of itself brings harm to others, and the truly evil character does not look at the effect that other actions might have.  Because there is no regard for the consequences of the action beyond causing harm, and no attempt on the character's part to justify or excuse it, the action and the character are both "evil."  Saying that this behavior or mindset is "crazy" is IMO just excusing misanthropic behavior...  either that, or attempting to explain it as something other than what it actually is.

[Eleinehmm]

Icy Magebane wrote...

Eleinehmm wrote...

Icy Magebane wrote...

Well, I hate to disprove a person so thoroughly, but when playing certain games, I sometimes believe that I am an evil person doing evil things.  Not everyone tries to justify their behavior...

Hmm, all right ? So why is your character doing Evil things ?  For the pure evil-lolz  (You as a player might, but a character, - only if he is crazy) ? All other things would be yes I think it's evil but the alternatives are worse(still a justification)/it's not evil.

The mindset of pure evil does not seek to compare actions or consequences.  The action in and of itself brings harm to others, and the truly evil character does not look at the effect that other actions might have.  Because there is no regard for the consequences of the action beyond causing harm, and no attempt on the character's part to justify or excuse it, the action and the character are both "evil."  Saying that this behavior or mindset is "crazy" is IMO just excusing misanthropic behavior...  either that, or attempting to explain it as something other than what it actually is.

Wait, "Pleasure from harming people" is justification, Why would you do evil if you are not getting this warm fuzzy feeling inside? The crazy  part is about doing evil things without any motivation (doing good without any motivation is here too), pleasure IS both a motivation and justification. We can't live without motivations : We are cause->effect creatures moving in time....

Modifié par Eleinehmm, 11 novembre 2013 - 09:05 .

[His Name was HYR!!]

Medhia Nox wrote...

@almostinsane99 Not really - it's so comically mustache twirling that it can only be taken in a meta-context.

Ohhh... look at me, the corrupt slaver searching for ultimate power.

Yes, it's "evil" - but it's the type of evil really only found in stories.

I agree that BioWarian villains can have a bad tendency to twirl their proverbial mustaches.

However, human-rights abuses in the pursuit of greater power very much exists outside the realm of stories.

[Icy Magebane]

Eleinehmm wrote...

Wait, "Pleasure from harming people" is justification, Why would you do evil if you are not getting this warm fuzzy feeling inside? The crazy  part is about doing evil things without any motivation (doing good without any motivation is here too), pleasure IS both a motivation and justification. We can't live without motivations : We are cause->effect creatures moving in time....

Hold on, I think we're arguing different points.  By "justification," I mean "providing an excuse to make this behavior acceptable."  I do not mean to imply that "justification" means "the cause of a certain action."  I agree that all actions have reasons behind them... even something motivated by mental instability or insanity would clearly have a chemical or psychological impetus.

You initially stated that you didn't believe that there are people who think they are evil.  I was giving you an example of how a person could indeed believe that they were evil and simply did not care whether this behavior was acceptable or justifiable in the eyes of others.  Alternative ways of viewing their behavior would not factor into their decisions nor would it cause them to feel guilty or justified.

Modifié par Icy Magebane, 11 novembre 2013 - 09:21 .

[Eleinehmm]

Icy Magebane wrote...

Eleinehmm wrote...

Wait, "Pleasure from harming people" is justification, Why would you do evil if you are not getting this warm fuzzy feeling inside? The crazy  part is about doing evil things without any motivation (doing good without any motivation is here too), pleasure IS both a motivation and justification. We can't live without motivations : We are cause->effect creatures moving in time....

Hold on, I think we're arguing different points.  By "justification," I mean "providing an excuse to make this behavior acceptable."  I do not mean to imply that "justification" means "the cause of a certain action."  I agree that all actions have reasons behind them... even something motivated by mental instability or insanity would clearly have a chemical or psychological impetus.

You initially stated that you didn't believe that there are people who think they are evil.  I was giving you an example of how a person could indeed believe that they were evil and simply did not care whether this behavior was acceptable or justifiable in the eyes of others.  Alternative ways of viewing their behavior would not factor into their decisions nor would it cause them to feel guilty or justified.

All right, revising the formulation then "I don't believe there are people who think that they are evil and find the idea of evil  as it's generaly def. by people significant at the same time"

[Icy Magebane]

@Eleinehmm - lol... yeah okay. Fair enough. (this being the internet, I feel I must say that I am not being sarcastic at all in this reply )

[Eleinehmm]

Icy Magebane wrote...

@Eleinehmm - lol... yeah okay. Fair enough. (this being the internet, I feel I must say that I am not being sarcastic at all in this reply )

Sure, have an internet beer, pal (this being the internet,  I feel I must say that I belive you, and am not being sarcastic when trying to assert my belive in you not beeing sarcastic)

[Medhia Nox]

Evil people are moral relativists by nature.

Common recidivists are moral relativists by choice.

Good people do not seek to excuse their failures.

[Angrywolves]

Consequences will bite the evil dudes in this game.
Should be worth a few laughs.

[Icy Magebane]

Angrywolves wrote...

Consequences will bite the evil dudes in this game.
Should be worth a few laughs.

Call me pessimistic, but I doubt that's true.  It's never been that way in the past...

[pdusen]

The Xand wrote...

pdusen wrote...

As someone who played all of the KOTOR, DA and ME series games--the only game where I felt like I was allowed to be really evil was KOTOR1. The worst you can do with the other ones is just be a huge jerk and make some morally ambiguous decisions.

Frankly, I miss KOTOR1's style of evil.

Force persuading a Wookie to kill his best friend was brilliant.

Indeed. It's one of those roleplaying moments I'll never, ever forget.

[leaguer of one]

Estelindis wrote...

leaguer of one wrote...

It not that the protagonist can't be truely evil. It's you don't have just plain evil for evil sake choices. All choice are morally grey. It's what you intend that make you actions evil.

You have the right to this opinion, of course, but it is not self-evident and I disagree with it.  I think that a person can truly commit evil, even when their motivations are, from their point of view, totally good.  I would say that several qualities combine to affect the moral status of an action: the act in itself; the intention of the actor; the circumstances in which the action is taken; the foreseeable consequences of the action; and the extent to which the action is truly free.  In my view, reducing all that to just intention impoverishes ethics.

In any case, setting that aside for the time being in order to return to video game morality, I return to your comment: "It's you don't have just plain evil for evil sake choices."  Do you mean that Bioware's characters can't do evil for evil's sake, or that no one does, in the world, ever?  I assume the former, since you add: "It's what you intend that make you actions evil."  Presumably, then, you think that some intentions do actually make actions evil.  So you believe that choices like those at the end of KotOR and Jade Empire are not evil for evil's sake?  What are they, then?  To me, both seem like they are chosen for power, but I see their way of obtaining said power as evil.  You don't see what they do as evil?  Or do I misunderstand?

More of a case there are no choice where a person can't see a moraly good reason to do. EXAMPLE:In kotor there is a mission where a woman is obsesed with a droid her late husband gave her and ask you to find it for her. When you find it you have the choice of destroying it and lying to the women that you did not find it but if she looks hard enough she my find it one day. This prompt her to look for the droid she will never find for the rest of her life. There is no moraly grey or good way too look t the choice. It just evil for evil sake. It someone's pain for you enjoyment. 
The dark ending for jade empire and kotor can still be looked into a grey area being that it can be seen as imposed order for the greater good as well.

[leaguer of one]

dragonflight288 wrote...

leaguer of one wrote...

dragonflight288 wrote...

I think the closest thing Bioware has done recently to make a true villain to play as was Jade Empire (written by Gaider and Laidlaw, ) if you choose to follow the path of the closed fist.

To date, that is the only game that has made me feel truly dirty and like scum after beating it on the Closed Fist ending.

Close fist is not totally evil. There two levels of it. One of the tyrant and one of the servivalist. Open palm also has a tyrant path as well.

Really? I've played it through maybe 6-7 times, most of them on Open Palm. How on earth do you get the tyrant's path on Open Palm?

Look at you're master and you'll see how. A good explination:
http://www.youtube.c...hnHJS_K-o#t=176

You're master falls to the tyrany part of open palm added if you figure that freeing the water dragon will restart the drought you my go that path too to stop it from happening.

Modifié par leaguer of one, 12 novembre 2013 - 03:44 .

[Xerxes52]

Angrywolves wrote...

Consequences will bite the evil dudes in this game.
Should be worth a few laughs.

You might be on to something.

Imagine if, right at the beginning of the final battle, all the armies you've gathered through treacherous and evil ways gather at your fortress.

Instead of joining the Inquisitor and going to fight the final fight, they say, "Sorry, we all think you're an evil bastard who is just as bad, if not worse then a horde of rampaging demons. We're going to obliterate your fortress, execute you, then we will go off to fight the final boss!"

And then the Inquisitor and party, instead of fighting a final battle against the demon horde's boss, has to fight a last stand against all their "allies" who've finally had enough of their crap. After finally being overrun, you are treated to a final cutscene where the Inquisitor and their surviving party members are executed and have their heads placed on pikes, with the screen fading to black as the armies march off to fight the final battle on their own.

[Hellion Rex]

Using the Force to curse a guy who pissed you off so that he could never speak again was quite amusing as well. I hope we can do something like that as a mage in Inquisition.

[DooomCookie]

Bioware does this pretty well. They do a more realistic, 'mercenary' evil rather than the Fable 'be a **** to everyone and kick puppies' evil.

[wicked cool]

If you let the villagers die or kill an npc will there be a penalty and/or will you get a reputation for being ruthless or kind hearted. I will be somewhat disappointed if it only affects companions.

What happens if you are a rogue and you are caught stealing? Any jail time or fines etc

[Icy Magebane]

@wicked cool - Good point. The town guard scene in Denerim was a nice touch, but they should expand on that. Stealing should harm your reputation with law enforcement and commoners, and you should at least be required to pay a fine (but not "return stolen goods," because that makes no sense. There's no way of knowing what's stolen and what isn't). Jail may or may not work, considering the fact that they need your help with the Veil tears... I don't know if they'd want to risk imprisoning you for a minor offense.

[snackrat]

As far as Loghain is concerned, we already have played the villian. He knew nothing about the darkspawn in the tower (no one did) - his men he trusted, but you? When the beacon is lit to late, surely you are responsible. He will not let his men be slaughtered for a cause you lost.

Then, as you doggedly hunt him down to finish the job, hunting him for daring not to fall into your 'trap' along with the king, he gets more and more desperate trying to remove these Orlesian-based forces from his land, to prevent a relapsed occupancy - the very occupancy that killed his father and destroyed his lands (as said in The Stolen Throne).

Villians and heroes are all subjective. Antagonist and protaganist are better terms, since heroes are typically whomever you are playing. Very few games and media have evil for the sake of evil, and the best antagonists aren't wholly evil, but merely selfish men.

[Angrywolves]

Will be this time magebane.
Go read the developer interviews.
Heck, they even talk about that village that gets massacred, due to the player's choices.
First time for everything.
shrugs.