434 réponses à ce sujet

[Mr.House]

Maria Caliban wrote...

Anyone remember the villains of To Kill a Mocking Bird?

The first was a drunk who found out his daughter was seeing a black man, and so beat her and forced her to claim she'd been raped. The second was the prosecutor, who knew the man on trail was probably innocent, but pushed for the death penalty anyway. After he wins, he attacks and tries to kill a child.

These characters have motivations, not lulzmindcontrolled.

[spike08]

I like both it can be done! Handsome jack wasn't ambiguous was he?

Modifié par spike08, 14 décembre 2013 - 04:03 .

[Plaintiff]

I don't see how lulzracist is any less simplistic or shallow. At least with someone under mind-control, there is the moral question of whether or not they personally should be held accountable.

An innocent person who legitimately cannot control themselves is miles more sympathetic than someone who is just a violent bigot out of hand.

Modifié par Plaintiff, 14 décembre 2013 - 04:03 .

[In Exile]

Fast Jimmy wrote...

While not anatgonists that we can strongly sympathize with, these motives are much more relatable than "indoctrniated by a race of Chtullu aliens" or "mind controlled by evil lyrium voodoo doll."

But isn't that what the request for humanizing the protagonist ultimately amounts to? I don't know about you, but "gone complete insane because of outside force" is a lot more relatable to me that "virulent racist". 

[Mr.House]

Plaintiff wrote...

I don't see how lulzracist is any less simplistic or shallow. At least with someone under mind-control, there is the moral question of whether or not they personally should be held accountable.

An innocent person who legitimately cannot control themselves is miles more sympathetic than someone who is just a violent bigot out of hand.

At least that lulzracist guy has motivations. Mind controlling is a lazy way to do something UNLESS the person doing the mind controlling is very well written and/or properly forshadowed. That is very rare, you cleary just want a lulzevil villian instead of a villian who has depth.

[In Exile]

Mr.House wrote...
At least that lulzracist guy has motivations.

"I think a subset of humans is worthless because of their skin-colour and should be actively oppresssed" is a motivation, sure, but it's the same kind of motivation as "I kill people because killing and causing pain is fun!". 

Modifié par In Exile, 14 décembre 2013 - 04:12 .

[Mr.House]

In Exile wrote...

Mr.House wrote...
At least that lulzracist guy has motivations.

"I think a subset of humans is worthless because of their skin-colour and should be actively oppresssed" is a motivation, sure, but it's the same kind of motivation as "I kill people because killing and causing pain is fun!". 

You are confusing mind control for the Joker motive.

[Medhia Nox]

@Mr. House: The Joker takes his own motives very seriously.

[In Exile]

Mr.House wrote...
You are confusing mind control for the Joker motive.

I'm not saying mind control isn't stupid, I'm just saying that racism isn't better. 

[AresKeith]

In Exile wrote...

Mr.House wrote...
You are confusing mind control for the Joker motive.

I'm not saying mind control isn't stupid, I'm just saying that racism isn't better. 

Where did he say it was?

[In Exile]

AresKeith wrote...
Where did he say it was?

Plaintiff said:"I don't see how lulzracist is any less simplistic or shallow..."

Mr. House responded: "At least that lulzracist guy has motivations."

To me that implies that the lulracist guy is better than mind control gal. 

[Mr.House]

In Exile wrote...

AresKeith wrote...
Where did he say it was?

Plaintiff said:"I don't see how lulzracist is any less simplistic or shallow..."

Mr. House responded: "At least that lulzracist guy has motivations."

To me that implies that the lulracist guy is better than mind control gal. 

Anything is better then lulzmindcontrol.

[Fast Jimmy]

In Exile wrote...

Fast Jimmy wrote...

While not anatgonists that we can strongly sympathize with, these motives are much more relatable than "indoctrniated by a race of Chtullu aliens" or "mind controlled by evil lyrium voodoo doll."

But isn't that what the request for humanizing the protagonist ultimately amounts to? I don't know about you, but "gone complete insane because of outside force" is a lot more relatable to me that "virulent racist". 

It may generate more sympathy, but I don't feel like it is more RELATABLE. 

Has anyone here ever been magically mind controlled? Been forced to do something, not by authority or societal pressures, but from a power beyond denial or their control? I highly doubt it.

Yet we all have succumb to our baser natures, of fearing (even hating) what we don't know or taught is different or inferior (again, the father) or for putting our own interests or successes (again, the lawyer) above what we know is right or better for others.

To me, it makes them even more monstrous... mostly because its easy to recognize that monster in the mirror. "A demon idol made me do it?" That's in a much more McGuffin territory than moving me emotionally or intellectually.

Modifié par Fast Jimmy, 14 décembre 2013 - 04:53 .

[Ravensword]

Mr.House wrote...

In Exile wrote...

AresKeith wrote...
Where did he say it was?

Plaintiff said:"I don't see how lulzracist is any less simplistic or shallow..."

Mr. House responded: "At least that lulzracist guy has motivations."

To me that implies that the lulracist guy is better than mind control gal. 

Anything is better then lulzmindcontrol.

Lulzheavilyabusedplotdevices.

[Shark17676]

MasterScribe wrote...

Sometimes a traditional antagonist works really well, and is more appropriate.

I completely agree.  The reboot of FMA, for example...taking the shades of gray away from the Homunculi and turning them pure evil worked out much better for the story.

Not every villain needs to have anti-hero, relatable qualities.  Sometimes it's better if bad is just that -- bad.

[KainD]

XxDeonxX wrote...
When you give the villain motivations and reasons for their actions like with Loghain doing what he did for the sake of Ferelden's security it makes for a good antagonist who to some can even be sympathetic and agreeable and if not this they at least make for a good well written antagonist.

What if I am going to say something like: ''Doing something for the sake of your country is a very stupid and cray motivation. Loghain was very badly written, I can't relate to him.''

When I see people complain about bioware's ''dehumanized'' antagonists ^ that above is what I hear. 

[Fredward]

Trying to argue that unambiguous bad guys are universally bad/inferior writing is just silly. Cuz they're not.

[Sidney]

Mr.House wrote...

Plaintiff wrote...

I don't see how lulzracist is any less simplistic or shallow. At least with someone under mind-control, there is the moral question of whether or not they personally should be held accountable.

An innocent person who legitimately cannot control themselves is miles more sympathetic than someone who is just a violent bigot out of hand.

At least that lulzracist guy has motivations. Mind controlling is a lazy way to do something UNLESS the person doing the mind controlling is very well written and/or properly forshadowed. That is very rare, you cleary just want a lulzevil villian instead of a villian who has depth.

Mind control could be lazy if they just zapped some random person and made the muwahahha evil... but for TIM, Meredtih and Saren the mind control isn't lazy. All the mind control does is amplifies and perverts their existing beliefs. TIM wanted to control the reapers, would use anything to get an edge and disliked working with aliens. Indoctrination changed none of that. Meredith distrusted the mages and was ready to nullify them with provokation. The idol changed none of that. Saren resented humanity and was a do anything to get the job done sort of guy. Indoctrination changed none of that.

It isn't like these people had no depth and were nothing but mind controlled drooling morons. They were acting consistently with their beliefs just amped up a bit too much.

[TEWR]

Shark17676 wrote...

MasterScribe wrote...

Sometimes a traditional antagonist works really well, and is more appropriate.

I completely agree.  The reboot of FMA, for example...taking the shades of gray away from the Homunculi and turning them pure evil worked out much better for the story.

Not every villain needs to have anti-hero, relatable qualities.  Sometimes it's better if bad is just that -- bad.

Ah yes, FMA: Brotherhood, remaining faithful to the original manga. Indeed, one could say they were traditional bad guys (I wouldn't) But they were still relatable and sympathetic in their own way. Envy in particular, whom I couldn't help but feel bad for. Wrath was also very relateable.

Traditional villains are indeed nice to see. But the homonculi were also supernatural in origin., which is different then a human antagonist.

[Sigma Tauri]

Fast Jimmy wrote...
To me, it makes them even more monstrous... mostly because its easy to recognize that monster in the mirror.

Nothin but net.

In Exile wrote...
"I
think a subset of humans is worthless because of their skin-colour and
should be actively oppresssed" is a motivation, sure, but it's the same
kind of motivation as "I kill people because killing and causing pain is
fun!".

Sorry dude. You may not empathize to an issue like racism, but it's not a one-dimensional or nonhuman issue.

Modifié par monkeycamoran, 14 décembre 2013 - 07:10 .

[In Exile]

Fast Jimmy wrote...
It may generate more sympathy, but I don't feel like it is more RELATABLE. 

Has anyone here ever been magically mind controlled? Been forced to do something, not by authority or societal pressures, but from a power beyond denial or their control? I highly doubt it.

We've (almost) all been intoxicated - it's a rite of passage in North America. And people do idiotic things like intoxicated. That's a lot closer - for me, at any rate - that being a racist. 

Yet we all have succumb to our baser natures, of fearing (even hating) what we don't know or taught is different or inferior (again, the father) or for putting our own interests or successes (again, the lawyer) above what we know is right or better for others.

To me, it makes them even more monstrous... mostly because its easy to recognize that monster in the mirror. "A demon idol made me do it?" That's in a much more McGuffin territory than moving me emotionally or intellectually.

There is an infinite - incredible - difference between being a jerk and being a racist. Between wanting to win at all costs and wanting to kill children. Or between wanting to win to a level that it hurts your personal relaitonships vs. actively hurting others. 

That's about as relatable as Darth Malak - someone who was jealous of his friend, and who loves killing for the sake of killing.

Modifié par In Exile, 14 décembre 2013 - 09:08 .

[Sylvius the Mad]

Maria Caliban wrote...

Anyone remember the villains of To Kill a Mocking Bird?

The first was a drunk who found out his daughter was seeing a black man, and so beat her and forced her to claim she'd been raped. The second was the prosecutor, who knew the man on trail was probably innocent, but pushed for the death penalty anyway. After he wins, he attacks and tries to kill a child.

It's a stretch to call those people villains.  The antagonist is the culture in which those people live.

Modifié par Sylvius the Mad, 14 décembre 2013 - 09:25 .

[Sylvius the Mad]

Take a game like KotOR - kotOR looks like it has a very uncomplicated antagonist. Darth Malak is a flat character.

But I think it takes an uncharitable view of KotOR's plot to identify Malak as the antagonist.

No, the antagonist of KotOR is the Jedi Order. It's a very personal struggle for the protagonist, as the Jedi try to force their view of the world on him, at the cost of even his own identity. And, to KotOR's credit, the game allows a possible outcome wherein the Jedi win, based on the player's choices.

KotOR does this very well. The Jedi are doing what they're doing for actual reasons that make sense to them, and might even make sense to the player. They're excellent villains.

[Fast Jimmy]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

Take a game like KotOR - kotOR looks like it has a very uncomplicated antagonist. Darth Malak is a flat character.

But I think it takes an uncharitable view of KotOR's plot to identify Malak as the antagonist.

No, the antagonist of KotOR is the Jedi Order. It's a very personal struggle for the protagonist, as the Jedi try to force their view of the world on him, at the cost of even his own identity. And, to KotOR's credit, the game allows a possible outcome wherein the Jedi win, based on the player's choices.

KotOR does this very well. The Jedi are doing what they're doing for actual reasons that make sense to them, and might even make sense to the player. They're excellent villains.

"From my point of view, the Jedi are evil."

"Then you truly are lost!"

Sorry, I don't disagree with your assesment, but this quote just popped in my head when I read it. 

Modifié par Fast Jimmy, 14 décembre 2013 - 12:57 .

[Kaiser Arian XVII]

Fast Jimmy wrote...

"From my point of view, the Jedi are evil."

sez


@Sylvius the Mad, since when trying to save someone from going to a destructive path makes you evil?

And I think Queen Morag (from NWN original campaign) is a typical enslaver kind but a well written villain (striving for her race revival and domination).

Modifié par Kaiser Arian, 14 décembre 2013 - 02:21 .