136 réponses à ce sujet

[Viidicus]

Well, its not that it isn't fun but it just seems that no one really cares, asif they're saying...'sure, you can go ahead and kill these few hundred people, we dont care'.. what im trying to say is that there is no real consequences for what you do becides pissing off a few party members. the rest of the world dont care, i mean. i could for example wipe out a whole village killing hundreds of people and no one would give a crap because at the end no matter what path you choose you seem to be a hero.

What im saying is that there is no real 'Evil' path, you can do evil things but with no consequence, people will still smile at you and be friendly.
You hear about how blood mages are evil and so forth throughout the game but you urself can role as a blood mage and no one will care... whats with that?

I think it would be sweet if the choices you choose in the game also effect how civilians treat you. If your an evil character they could snob you off and be nasty, or fear you and hand over money.

who's to say your character wanted to be a grey warden, what if you were conscripted and forced into it does that mean you have to abide by the rules?.

Modifié par Viidicus, 23 janvier 2010 - 12:27 .

[-Conspirator]

There are some pretty "evil" things you can do, with noticeable consequences. It's just not always so obvious.

[Aeto Alessos]

Viidicus wrote...

who's to say your character wanted to be a grey warden, what if you were conscripted and forced into it does that mean you have to aboide by the rules?.

I recall there being dialogue like "It wasn't my choice, i don't want to be a warden" something similiar to that anyhow. You don't have to abide by "the rules" i guess the soldier in the Korcari wilds is a good example of that.

[Tirigon]

If you are truly evil NOONE will be impolite to you.



Honestly, would you dare pissing someone off who is known to kill a few 100 people just for fun, or would you rather try to make sure he doesn´t kill you?

[purplesunset]

Viidicus wrote...

Well, its not that it isn't fun but it just seems that no one really cares, asif they're saying...'sure, you can go ahead and kill these few hundred people, we dont care'.. what im trying to say is that there is no real consequences for what you do becides pissing off a few party members. the rest of the world dont care, i mean. i could for example wipe out a whole village killing hundreds of people and no one would give a crap because at the end no matter what path you choose you seem to be a hero.

What im saying is that there is no real 'Evil' path, you can do evil things but with no consequence, people will still smile at you and be friendly.
You hear about how blood mages are evil and so forth throughout the game but you urself can role as a blood mage and no one will care... whats with that?

I think it would be sweet if the choices you choose in the game also effect how civilians treat you. If your an evil character they could snob you off and be nasty, or fear you and hand over money.

who's to say your character wanted to be a grey warden, what if you were conscripted and forced into it does that mean you have to aboide by the rules?.

Wow. I never play evil characters, but this raises a red flag for me because I do care about consequences.

The weight of consequences is what separates great works  from good works. I love the example of Frodo in Lotr. Even though the good guys won, Frodo still suffered the consequences of his choices and could no longer return to being the hobbit he was before he started his quest. 

If  playing a chaotic evil madman has as little effect as  you depict in this thread, then yeah, that's  somehting they should try to work on in DA 2.  (and again, I don't even play evil characters myself, but I'm more concerned about the effect of consequences)

Modifié par purplesunset, 23 janvier 2010 - 12:33 .

[Lakmoots]

This is wrong.

There are *plenty* of consequences and reactions that come up in dialogue.

You can get the whole of the Dalish community annoyed by screwing that girl and stealing... then have them all killed.

Orzammar is the same, you can insult shopkeepers who won't serve you, install a brutal or useless king, and get attacked by many who hate you.

You can also let Redcliffe get slaughtered.

The consequences always pop up, even in dialogue. The main effect is that people *close* to you who can see what you are doing get really offended and leave or attack you in camp.

Without the Internet, the rest of Ferelden *dont know* what you are doing... why would they?

I think that you must be referring to Denerim only, which is a big city... no one knows who the heck you are... you have spent most of your time roaming the wilds and such.

And even then... there is a main story that has to happen regardless of whether you are a corrupt bastard or a moral saint...

Unless you want an option where you abandon the Warden's and don't fight the Blight.

That is called switching off the game.

[nubbers666]

personly i think that this needs to be fixed if u make evil or good choices u should get bouns to how pepole treat u for instance u can intemadate a shop keeper to give u a discount or u can presuade him and interaction other than cry baby alistor or pms morgan would be affected by this as well if ur evil the lil kids will run from u screaming and such

[draxynnus]

This looks to me like it may be a function of the "more enlightened" system of tracking the effects of deeds through party approval...but having no "global" system.



Perhaps what a hypothetical sequel needs is a system of approval scores for various factions within the game, with each acting friendly or hostile to you depending on your rating with that faction. In this way, a character who acts in a certain way will win approval from groups that agree with those actions and disapproval from those who don't - so a character's approval with various groups will rise or fall naturally with their actions (although what they can't possibly know about can't hurt you), and a character who's an omnicidal maniac will quickly find themselves short on allies as the word gets around.



Come to think on it, this system could also be used to create knock-on-effects from actions taken even when a particular Companion isn't around - a character like Morrigan, for instance, might express disapproval as you increase your approval with the Chantry.

[Yozaro]

Lakmoots wrote...

Unless you want an option where you abandon the Warden's and don't fight the Blight.

That is called switching off the game.

It would still be great to have two main paths to follow, the good and the evil. What if your character chooses to accompany the people who are normally enemies in the game? You would get totally different companions who might be more like henchmen instead of friends. There could then also be the dramatic ending where the evil loses.

However, I know it's rather impossible to make two main paths because of the amount of work required to make them. Many more characters, models, voice actors, variables to handle... And it would be almost like a different story.

But to what extent would this be possible?

[draxynnus]

Bioware's done it before, but usually in the form of a last-minute power grab that doesn't really fit with DA's storyline.

[Sisimka]

I think the consequences of being and evil **** are pretty clear-cut. This is a no spoilers forum, so it's hard to get into detail, but let's say you're pretty 'lonely' at the end of the game. Also, you gotta go ahead finish it out, if you let the blight proceed and the arch demon win, you don't get to be 'god' of your new order.

[Tirigon]

draxynnus wrote...

Bioware's done it before, but usually in the form of a last-minute power grab that doesn't really fit with DA's storyline.

Well, declaring yourself King and killing every noble who disagrees would have been possible.

[Lakmoots]

Um... I think you all want a different game.



Darkspawn henchmen and a black flag for the Blight Cheerleader squadron?

[Yozaro]

The problem in being evil in a game with this kind of story is that you would have no goal. Or basically you would, but the good guys always have this "great quest" they are on and eventually they get to their goal and the fate of the characters is decided. What would the bad guy do while the good guys are gathering allies? It would require lots of work to make the evil side as fun to play as the good side.

Being a chaotic and evil madman in Oblivion just meant that you won't get any quests and guards will attack you. You are not on any mission... The game becomes pointless. Many other games have the same problem; You're forced to be good, because being bad just isn't fun.

In DA:O this is a bit different. You still get the quests, since your evil doings doesn't bother anyone. Your companion might make one comment about them, but nothing else. And even if you are evil, you will still have to work for the same objective as the good guys do.

EDIT: Just thinking. As I mentioned already, it's would require too much work to have to main stories with different dialogues, characters, quests etc...

Modifié par Yozaro, 23 janvier 2010 - 01:11 .

[Viidicus]

Yozaro wrote...

The problem in being evil in a game with this kind of story is that you would have no goal. Or basically you would, but the good guys always have this "great quest" they are on and eventually they get to their goal and the fate of the characters is decided. What would the bad guy do while the good guys are gathering allies? It would require lots of work to make the evil side as fun to play as the good side.

Being a chaotic and evil madman in Oblivion just meant that you won't get any quests and guards will attack you. You are not on any mission... The game becomes pointless. Many other games have the same problem; You're forced to be good, because being bad just isn't fun.

In DA:O this is a bit different. You still get the quests, since your evil doings doesn't bother anyone. Your companion might make one comment about them, but nothing else. And even if you are evil, you will still have to work for the same objective as the good guys do.

EDIT: Just thinking. As I mentioned already, it's would require too much work to have to main stories with different dialogues, characters, quests etc...

Fallout 3 does this quite well, the main quests you undertook had choices the 'Good' the 'neutral' and the 'evil' and depending which choices you choose you will see characters act different towards you. DA:O gives you these choics too at times but leaves no consequence and even with most of the dialoge you encounter with civilians you can tell that the game is in a way forcing you to be good.

[Graciemae]

Did you miss the fact that 'evil' doings cause you to have a different set of allies for the final battle?

[Chokladglass]

People in another part of Ferelden don't know if you go around killing people in the wilds. How could they? If you consider that your adversaries get away with some awful crimes (see, no names mentioned and no spoilers), why shouldn't you do, too?

[Korvayer]

For me, being evil is less fun because I have a tendency to become personally detached from my character, but that's no fault of Bioware. I suppose I'm not versatile enough in my ability to roleplay.

[Wishpig]

Korvayer wrote...

For me, being evil is less fun because I have a tendency to become personally detached from my character, but that's no fault of Bioware. I suppose I'm not versatile enough in my ability to roleplay.

You and me both... I don't feel so much detached as I do horribly guilty. It's stupid cause their f*in computer game characters, but I still can't screw them over.

I even feel bad when I charge someone for a good deed if theres an option to refuse payment.

[Korvayer]

I hear you, Wishpig.

Modifié par Korvayer, 23 janvier 2010 - 04:21 .

[Abriael_CG]

Lakmoots wrote...

Um... I think you all want a different game.
Darkspawn henchmen and a black flag for the Blight Cheerleader squadron?

This. I always find the "i want to be ebiiiiil!" stance rather giggle-worthy. It's obvious that the developers need to put the most effort in the part of the storyline that will be followed by the most people, and luckily, most eople still like to play good, even because that obviously makes for the best story and for the most gameplay (people kill quest givers and then complain that the game doesn't last as long as promised? Smartiepants...).

So yeah, if you want to be a shady character, or roguish, whatever floats your boat really. If you want to be the evil overlord, this game isn't for you. It's that simple, and there's nothing wrong with that.

Otherwise, you can always try pen and paper, given that you can find a master patient enough to put up with your trips (since mastering evi-friendlyl campaigns is one of the most unfun and simply boring experiences ever for a dungeon master).

Modifié par Abriael_CG, 23 janvier 2010 - 04:40 .

[Kail Ashton]

Lakmoots wrote...

This is wrong.

There are *plenty* of consequences and reactions that come up in dialogue.

You can get the whole of the Dalish community annoyed by screwing that girl and stealing... then have them all killed.

Orzammar is the same, you can insult shopkeepers who won't serve you, install a brutal or useless king, and get attacked by many who hate you.

You can also let Redcliffe get slaughtered.

The consequences always pop up, even in dialogue. The main effect is that people *close* to you who can see what you are doing get really offended and leave or attack you in camp.

Without the Internet, the rest of Ferelden *dont know* what you are doing... why would they?

I think that you must be referring to Denerim only, which is a big city... no one knows who the heck you are... you have spent most of your time roaming the wilds and such.

And even then... there is a main story that has to happen regardless of whether you are a corrupt bastard or a moral saint...

Unless you want an option where you abandon the Warden's and don't fight the Blight.

That is called switching off the game.

lol i was going to comment on the topic creators lack of comprehension but this guy beat me to it, bravo sir~!

[Moirnelithe]

Abriael_CG wrote...

Lakmoots wrote...

Um... I think you all want a different game.
Darkspawn henchmen and a black flag for the Blight Cheerleader squadron?

This. I always find the "i want to be ebiiiiil!" stance rather giggle-worthy. It's obvious that the developers need to put the most effort in the part of the storyline that will be followed by the most people, and luckily, most eople still like to play good, even because that obviously makes for the best story and for the most gameplay (people kill quest givers and then complain that the game doesn't last as long as promised? Smartiepants...).

So yeah, if you want to be a shady character, or roguish, whatever floats your boat really. If you want to be the evil overlord, this game isn't for you. It's that simple, and there's nothing wrong with that.

Otherwise, you can always try pen and paper, given that you can find a master patient enough to put up with your trips (since mastering evi-friendlyl campaigns is one of the most unfun and simply boring experiences ever for a dungeon master).

I strongly disagree with this. If you want to play evil get a different game? Wth. This is an RPG there should be fun in playing evil. RPG doesn't mean it's only for goody-two-shoes. As this game is a 'dark' rpg I expected far more -sensible- ways to be an evil character. Murder everything in your path isn't the kind of evil I'm referring to btw, I just call that Chaotic Stupid. Dragon Age really does tend to railroad you into being good and I rather detest that. I loved being evil in NWN 2 and I was rather disappointed in the 'evil' things you can do in DA.

It saddens me to see that so many people do not want more of an evil side in a game, why does it bother you so much. Are you afraid you won't be able to play good anymore? Does it detract from your gaming experience? You can still play good if you want to. So why all the negative responses?

[Abriael_CG]

Evainelithe wrote...

I strongly disagree with this. If you want to play evil get a different game? Wth. This is an RPG there should be fun in playing evil. RPG doesn't mean it's only for goody-two-shoes. As this game is a 'dark' rpg I expected far more -sensible- ways to be an evil character. Murder everything in your path isn't the kind of evil I'm referring to btw, I just call that Chaotic Stupid. Dragon Age really does tend to railroad you into being good and I rather detest that. I loved being evil in NWN 2 and I was rather disappointed in the 'evil' things you can do in DA.

If you want a "true" rpg, again, pen and paper is a way (still provided that you can find a master willing to submit to hours upon hours of boredom by mastering an evil campaign).
I also have to let you know that "dark" fantasy has absolutely nothing to do with the characters being evil, it has to do with the world around them having a different flavor compared to heroic fantasy or high fantasy. As a matter of fact, main characters in dark fantasy aren't more or less evil than any heroic fantasy character.
If you detest the fact that dragon age "railroads" you in being good (which is untrue by the way, as other pointed out, there are many renegade-ish acts to be done, while OF COURSE you're not allowed to ally with the blight, thank goodness), you might simply consider playing another game, that of course will have a much worse story for the reason explained below, but whatever floats your boat 

It saddens me to see that so many people do not want more of an evil side in a game, why does it bother you so much. Are you afraid you won't be able to play good anymore? Does it detract from your gaming experience? You can still play good if you want to. So why all the negative responses?

It's pretty simple. Resources for games aren't infinite. There's no reason for a developer to spend more resources on a side that will be played by the vast (but oh so vocal) minority, with the result of spending less on flashing out the good side, that will be played and enjoyed by the most people.

[BroBear Berbil]

In any game with moral choices I will play one token evil character but usually I don't find them enjoyable because in most games "evil" means destroying content rather than shaping or creating new content.



DA I find is much better in this regard. If you play as a jerk you're rewarded plenty for it and I actually liked my grade A ***hole mage character.