434 réponses à ce sujet

[Lotion Soronarr]

I kinda like both kinds AS LONG AS TEHY ARE DONE WELL.

Both have their place. But FFS don't flip-flop.

TIM really got the shaft - with each new DLC and mission more the DERPERUS faliures were shown, compeltley undermining the very thing that's supposed to define him - pragmatism and efficiency. Then all of his bad traits were ramped up to 11 and he was given the brainwashing treatment. Horrible.

[reeferdemon]

I think variety is key. Sometimes I get sick of sympathizing with villains and just want someone who is truly detestable.

[Zatche]

I'd like to offer a different perspective. I think OP is begging the question.

Why is having Meredith "go crazy" by the Red Lyrium dehumanizing her? Do we think of the mentally ill as nonhuman? Does the red lyrium make her backstory less tragic?

[Slayer299]

I agree with you, for the most part, OP. But the writers don't need to humanize every villain and I think that it can be dangerous in that if you try to make them to 'human' you can actually make them lesser, in other words - Some villains are just meant to be evil, plain mustacio wearing EVIL. no humanity necessity. And then you have some like Loghain (and should have been Meredith) where the 'human' part actually adds to what makes their villainy so evil.

They did a great job with Loghain in DAO, you could see what/why he took the throne and everything else. You could hate his guts about it, agree or not, but it was clear and it made him a great character. The AD was a standard "I am an evil to be destroyed" and served his purpose well, no complaints. Then you had Meredith in DA2...and she just dropped off the rails at the last act/ending there and instead became a cartoon villain.

So evil for evil sake can be good or humanizing, it just has to fit, not shoehorned in in either way.

[Nharia1]

eluvianix wrote...

Ieldra2 wrote...

eluvianix wrote...
I am actually quite fine with the antagonists that we have had so far.

I'm fine with DAO's mix. Meredith and Orsino, not so much. And don't get me started on the presentation of the Reapers.

Yes, let's not start on the Reapers, lest we summon David from the depths of the ME3 forums.

I have to ask, what is his problem, he's like the ultimate nay sayer... I swear he doesnt agree with anything...

On Topic: Personally I think it really depends on the antagonist and what their goal is. Loghain was well written and his actions really made sense, if you looked at the from a certain perspective. Even most of Meredith's did as well, up until she saw daemons and blood mages poping out of the cracks in the street... but up until then, she had a somewhat rational fear of what could happen... it just went a little.... overboard if you will.

[Slayer299]

Zatche wrote...

I'd like to offer a different perspective. I think OP is begging the question.

Why is having Meredith "go crazy" by the Red Lyrium dehumanizing her? Do we think of the mentally ill as nonhuman? Does the red lyrium make her backstory less tragic?

Because having Merdith go crazy because of the RL seemed like a cheap excuse, rather than having her changing because of what happened to her in her backstory and the events of Acts III-IV which pushed her over the edge. One is a flaw, the other is a cheap way to explain her change into crazy town in Act IV/End. 

[Tinu]

I agree with the OP.

The bad: I was mostly disappointed when Orsino totally lost it. I understand it needed to happen, when you sided with the templars. You were one of the few, who could make a difference, but you chose the side of a tyrant (aka Meredith). But if you sided with the mages, then you at least could save a few mages. Orsino should have found hope in that, but oh no, he went completely and desperately insane.

The good: Loghain was a wonderful antagonist. We even had the chance to let him redeem himself. I almost never let him in my party (1/8 times), but to have the option is quite amazing. I don't mean that we need to recruit every antagonist (anything but that), but it would be cool if there was a possibility to work with them or let them go. Anders became an antagonist as well and I thought it was well done.

[Giga Drill BREAKER]

Some of the greatest antagonists in video games had no reason to be evil, other than just because they wanted too.

[Zatche]

Slayer299 wrote...

Zatche wrote...

I'd like to offer a different perspective. I think OP is begging the question.

Why is having Meredith "go crazy" by the Red Lyrium dehumanizing her? Do we think of the mentally ill as nonhuman? Does the red lyrium make her backstory less tragic?

Because having Merdith go crazy because of the RL seemed like a cheap excuse, rather than having her changing because of what happened to her in her backstory and the events of Acts III-IV which pushed her over the edge. One is a flaw, the other is a cheap way to explain her change into crazy town in Act IV/End. 

I suppose that is fair. Dragon Age likes to use Red Lyrium and Demons to expose human faults that already exist. I can see how it can come off as a cheapening the character development rather than highlighting it as intended.

I still don't think it makes her less human, though. Drugs make people do crazy things. I don't think of drug addicts as nonhuman. Scary and creepy, sure. But still human. Speaking of the word scary, there is my problem with Meredith, actually. Not very threatening. 

Modifié par Zatche, 12 décembre 2013 - 03:20 .

[wolfhowwl]

The key word there being wanted, not because of red lyrium, indoctrination, or mind control.

[Zatche]

Modifié par Zatche, 12 décembre 2013 - 03:06 .

[Giga Drill BREAKER]

wolfhowwl wrote...

The key word there being wanted, not because of red lyrium, indoctrination, or mind control.

Well you could argue that Merdith got what she really wanted because of the Red Lyrium. But yeah I agree I'm tired of things like red lyrium, indoctrination. I just want a villain to be straight up evil just because they are, I'm even tired of villains who are evil because something happened them and etc.

[Spaghetti_Ninja]

I disagree about the Archdemon being the ''real'' enemy of DA:O. The blight itself (including the Archdemons) were something in the background you were fighting constantly and yeah, of course you were fighting and collecting armies to end the Blight in Ferelden.

But kicking over Loghain, getting revenge for your mentor and ending the bounty on the Warden's head was something you and Alistair planned to do from the moment he betrayed Cailin and the Wardens, and when that happened, the game got it's real climax, IMO. Loghain was far more visible and a far more immediate threat during the game itself, while the Blight was something that really got tackled in Awakening.

Modifié par Spaghetti_Ninja, 12 décembre 2013 - 04:12 .

[Kaiser Arian XVII]

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

I kinda like both kinds AS LONG AS TEHY ARE DONE WELL.

Both have their place. But FFS don't flip-flop.

TIM really got the shaft - with each new DLC and mission more the DERPERUS faliures were shown, compeltley undermining the very thing that's supposed to define him - pragmatism and efficiency. Then all of his bad traits were ramped up to 11 and he was given the brainwashing treatment. Horrible.

^

[Laughing_Man]

Kaiser Arian wrote...

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

I kinda like both kinds AS LONG AS TEHY ARE DONE WELL.

Both have their place. But FFS don't flip-flop.

TIM really got the shaft - with each new DLC and mission more the DERPERUS faliures were shown, compeltley undermining the very thing that's supposed to define him - pragmatism and efficiency. Then all of his bad traits were ramped up to 11 and he was given the brainwashing treatment. Horrible.

^

^^

[Usergnome]

How was Meredith dehumanized? Excluding her last moments where she became insane and turned on Hawke and her own Templars.

Before then, all she did was protect the people of Kirkwall from Blood Mages and Demons. And look, she was right in the end. So many mages (Including Orsino himself) were practicing Blood Magic. So many turned into abominations.

Its not like Meredith just hated mages for no reason; her own sister was an apostate her family kept hidden until she became an abomination and murdered 72 people, including all of Meredith's family. She was just a little girl, too.

So, I think Meredith wasn't dehumanized at all. As she said to Orsino, "If you cannot show me a better way, do not brand ME a tyrant!" Because there was no other way! And total freedom just leads to the horribleness known as Tevinter.

[MKDAWUSS]

I'd like to know how you can... uh... <i>humanize</i> the demons coming out of the veil. I get the feeling the source of the veil rips will be a dehumanized entity.

[Vortex13]

I am all for having relatable villains and antagonists, but I personally don't consider the 'pure evil' antagonists as a step down in the narrative.

Having intricate, and complex antagonistic characters is very interesting and life like, but there comes a point where everything becomes so entangled that the narrative actually bogs down. It has been mentioned that the big bad as a force of nature is more about pushing the plot along, it exists to give the characters a reason to do the things they do, and that it true. Also, (at least for me) the 'pure' evil is a great way to cut through the crap of endless bickering and debate.

There have been times where I have wished for an alien invasion, or robotic uprising to happen in the real world (yeah I'm weird like that); not because of all the casualties that humanity would suffer, but because having an outside force show up; one that is dead set on killing all of us; means that all our petty squabbles will stop. We will all unite against a common foe and at least as long as the threat lasts, we will be working together.

Pure evil monsters; such as the Reapers (Pre-Catalyst), or the Archdemon; give me that scenario in fiction. I am all for having human like characters, but there does come a time, when I hear about the US government shutting down AGAIN; because of endless, pointless back and forth; that I catch myself wishing for something to happen, something that gets all sides to shut up, and actually try and work together.

/rant

[thats1evildude]

People often point at Loghain, but they forget how many people seeth with hatred for Arl Howe and Bann Vaughan, who don't have a single endearing quality.

The truth is that there's room for both types of antagonists: the more relatable villains with sympathetic goals and backstories, and the more monstrous villains who revel in destruction. It'd be boring and predictable if we only ever got one type.

[The Elder King]

I agree completely with Lotion Soronnar and simfam13 (expecially the last line).

[efd731]

MasterScribe wrote...

XxDeonxX wrote...
Snip

An Antagonist can indeed be complex and interesting and beyond redemption.. But an antagonist cant be complex and interesting and completely insane / possessed.

You need to expand your horizons, sir.

In Far Cry 3, the secondary antagonist Vaas is a murdering slaver who either rebelled against his incestuous (and possibly equally insane and complex) sister or was corrupted by money and drugs, or both, or neither. It might have just been the island, which seems to have an odd effect on everyone. It's apparently magical.

i am am a little late to this party, but Vaas was wonderfully written and had the additional benifit of being bat**** crazy. But I imagine it would be very difficult to put a character like this into a dragon age game. The conflict between Jason and Vaas was very personal, the bad guys of dragon age tend to have slightly loftier goals and ambitions. As for repetitive "crazy villains"  "Did I ever tell you the definition of insanity?"B)

[rapscallioness]

Well, I think it is two fold. Rendon Howe was an example of a truly detestable antagonist. Especially as human noble. That guy, I savored the moment I could shank him. And I did it with the Cousland family blade even tho by that time the blade was weaker than the sword I had. But I was just determined he would die by Cousland blade.

Loghain was extremely well done. I was itching to get this guy, but by the end of the game I could understand where he was coming from. I didn't agree at all with what he did, but I could see. I killed him, but it was one giant, "Goddamit Loghain!"

Even the Archdemon, initially I was fine with the idea that they were just pure evil using the darkspawn to destroy everything. But then I read about how they were awakened, how they are instantly corrupted by the darkspawn; twisted and corrupted. It was a painful and horrific ordeal, and if it's anything like the Joining, I imagine it was.

So, the Old Gods, thru the darkspawn, became the Archdemon--and then purely evil, but I then questioned whether, or not, it was something the Old Gods chose to do, or if this transformation was forced upon them? Who in fact is using who? The Old Gods become tainted in the extreme, mindless in that way.

I'm not saying the Old Gods were all sunshine and butterflies even without the taint, but it does make me wonder just what exactly is going on here?

So while I don;t expect, nor want, every bad guy to stand about in the throes of a monologue (sometimes you do need good game fodder), I do hope there is a good balance. Especially with the factions, ot the leaders of the factions. I imagine we're going to be butting heads with these quite often--forget the fade demons. The factions may prove more of a threat.

I hope they present these kinda potential allies/enemies in a more fleshed out manner. Like the Red Templars--I hope they aren't just muahaha!fodder. Whoever they are, I''d like them to represent a real being that holds a position, rather than a position. And that includes all the motivations; doubts; internal struggles and set backs as wells as triumphs. So if i have to kill them, it will be more of a "goddammit!" moment.

Although, slaying that rats azz Howe was a treat. (and then it was, oh, hai, Nathanial. ahem. lol!)

[Giga Drill BREAKER]

Dragon Age needs one of these

[rapscallioness]

I will admit, I don;t know if too much humanizing of the villain will actually make them less scary.

One of the scariest villains I've come across was from Firefly...what was his name?...Earl? It was Earl something. Or Jubal.

Anyway he was a bounty hunter looking for one of their crew. This guy scared the crap outta me precisely because he was so completely crazy evil. But a Cold Blooded kinda evil. Not barking mad and emotional about it, although he did occasionally go off on some weird tangents.

edit: he was like a serial killer that actually gets off on hurting ppl...shivers, I tell ya. Shivers.

Modifié par rapscallioness, 12 décembre 2013 - 07:54 .