69 réponses à ce sujet

[The_Shade]

I've seriously enjoyed both Origins and Inquisition with DA2 to a lesser extent. However, I've found in all three games irrespective 

of my choices whether it be helping Anders blow up the Chantry and letting him live or being a complete douche as the Warden regardless my character is still considered either a hero or champion. 

 

So rather than this continuation of being the hero saving a part of Thedas from some big bad evil, what if you could create a character who became THAT particular evil in Thedas? We already know that Tevinter is a particularly corrupt and unethical nation so it would be perfect play to kick things off. That's not to say that we could still keep the usual superficial choice system where you can make decisions but ultimately you're character's desire is one of pure darkness instead of the growing trend of picking 'evil' decisions for the greater good. 

 

You could also have companions who join and support you're evil schemes and agenda as well as companions who sign up to find you're not the person they expected etc. 

 

Probably getting ahead of myself but it would be truly epic if the potential villain from DA4 went into conflict with another hero in a future Dragon Age game although that may be asking too much. 

 

The last time a similar option was explored in Bioware games to my knowledge was in both Jade Empire and Star Wars Knights of the Old Republic which were impressive games to say the least. 

 

 

[Elsariel]

I respect your opinion but I don't think I'd be playing a game like that.  I like being the hero.  I don't want to be "evil".  It doesn't all have to be sunshine and rainbows but I like to play characters with a good moral compass.  

 

Though, I can appreciate that others like playing the big baddie so I think making the game where you could go BOTH routes would be perfectly acceptable.  Let people be baddies and let people be heroes.  Have the same goal but two different approaches.  

[DArkwarrior26]

a dlc/prequel like that would be nice

[The_Shade]

I respect your opinion but I don't think I'd be playing a game like that.  I like being the hero.  I don't want to be "evil".  It doesn't all have to be sunshine and rainbows but I like to play characters with a good moral compass.  

 

Though, I can appreciate that others like playing the big baddie so I think making the game where you could go BOTH routes would be perfectly acceptable.  Let people be baddies and let people be heroes.  Have the same goal but two different approaches.  

 

 

 

The respect is mutual. I'm only demanding this because it seems literally the only way for it to happen in Bioware games. Whether you're given a choice in Bioware games whether that be Mass Effect or Bioware they almost always prove to be superficial. Ideally, I would agree but I just don't see the two way approach happening given Bioware's history when crafting plot conclusions recently.  

[Damican]

In short , it wouldn't make any sense if you were to play the " bad guy " . I mean ,that would be like asking to play as the Reapers in Mass Effect game. I get where you're coming from, but Bioware is all about being the good guy and saving the world. Sure, you can be an ass to those around you, but the end goal is the same.

[Dakota Strider]

I am sure there will be a market for it.  Not sure how large.  I would not buy it myself.

[The_Shade]

In short , it wouldn't make any sense if you were to play the " bad guy " . I mean ,that would be like asking to play as the Reapers in Mass Effect game. I get where you're coming from, but Bioware is all about being the good guy and saving the world. Sure, you can be an ass to those around you, but the end goal is the same.

 

It doesn't have to be alike to the Reapers in Mass Effect where they were pure evil. It could be a character follows a dark path out of necessity to survive and/or help his family and friends and then pursues it to the end for those reasons. I would like to say grey path but I'm not sure that's possible in a Bioware game anymore. Especially if you consider the decisions you make at the end of Act 3 between the Mages or Templars which have no effect on Hawke's perception whatsoever. 

[harlekein]

I think setting a story in Tevinter could be interesting though, but not as a ridiculous "I am evil and relishing it." In truth, no one believes they are evil, they are doing the right thing. What if you would play a Tevinter character, working toward what you think is good, only to start hearing perspectives of those who oppose you, but you keep choosing for yourself or "the greater good". To me that would be a more interesting take on building an "evil character".

 

One thing comes to mind and it's in Game of Thrones when one of the slaves begs Daenaris not to banish slavery. She thinks she is doing good, but to that particular slave she is seen as doing harm.

[Nefla]

I think something like less than 25% of players choose evil options so I don't know how well that game would be received. Personally I hate playing a cruel and evil character (unless it's campy and hilarious like ME2 but I'm still nice to my companions).

[Starki113r]

As an official sequel? Not going to happen; the market for playing the protagonist, the world-saver, the guy who must always come out on top in the end, is vastly, vastly greater than those who want to play a legitimate ******.

 

As a spin-off, whether it's a dlc or a game, it might be possible, but be fully prepared to see your character get killed, imprisoned, banished, mutilated, and/or mind-lobotimized in the end.

[Surena.]

That would be better than sex.

[The_Shade]

I think setting a story in Tevinter could be interesting though, but not as a ridiculous "I am evil and relishing it." In truth, no one believes they are evil, they are doing the right thing. What if you would play a Tevinter character, working toward what you think is good, only to start hearing perspectives of those who oppose you, but you keep choosing for yourself or "the greater good". To me that would be a more interesting take on building an "evil character".

 

One thing comes to mind and it's in Game of Thrones when one of the slaves begs Daenaris not to banish slavery. She thinks she is doing good, but to that particular slave she is seen as doing harm.

 

I understand that but, if I was to say let's play as a grey character. We could just immediately put forward our Wardens and Hawke. It's nothing particularly new and radical. Playing as a character who is considered in one part of Thedas a villain and another part of Thedas e.g. Tevinter as a hero would inspire controversy and appeal to fans in different ways like Loghain did in Dragon Age Origins. Heck, if you talk to you're Quartermaster in DAI she's still debating he's actions now ,a decade later. I like those characters as NPCs, I would love to play as those characters even more instead being perceived as a hero no matter how grey my actions are in Dragon Age. 

[The_Shade]

As an official sequel? Not going to happen; the market for playing the protagonist, the world-saver, the guy who must always come out on top in the end, is vastly, vastly greater than those who want to play a legitimate ******.

 

 

 

It's still possible, GTA is complete proof of that. 

[Xhaiden]

I think something like less than 25% of players choose evil options so I don't know how well that game would be received. Personally I hate playing a cruel and evil character (unless it's campy and hilarious like ME2 but I'm still nice to my companions).

 

^

 

The vast majority of gamers don't actually like to play "evil" unless its in a campy humourous sense ala Dungeon Keeper. Once its presented in a serious sense few people will play it but now you're doing things and making decisions that are legitimately immoral or unethical. The fundamental problem is that in a serious game its extremely difficult to give a player a motivation to be evil. Because no matter the reason you give the player they can reason there way out of it to some degree and you can't just tell them well you're evil because you're evil. 

 

Its just human nature to be honest. 

 

You could assign the role of the villain to the PC and leave it from there though. Every Dragon Age game assigns you a role ( The Warden, The Champion, The Inquisitor ) and then leaves it up to you to navigate. So you could play it that way. Assign the role of the villain to the player and the world views them as a villain. But have their objective be something actually good or heroic that they're trying to complete while struggling against the stigma the world is imposing on them. That kind of role would be loaded with RP as you try to convince people of your intentions or utilize more unsavory elements of society to further your objectives. Ends justify the means, etc.

[Xhaiden]

It's still possible, GTA is complete proof of that. 

 

GTA is a sandbox and it doesn't cast you as The Villain™. The thing about GTA is not villainy, its chaos. Aside from basement sociopaths no one is playing GTA legitimately wandering around murdering prostitutes because they hate women. They're playing to create chaos and lunacy and deriving entertainment from upending the system then watching how the sandbox simulation reacts to their actions. 

[Spectre Impersonator]

I always wanted to customize both the protagonist and antagonist in an RPG.

[Dakota Strider]

Older Bioware games did allow you to play as "evil" within the storyline.  Of course, that was before voice acting for every interaction with NPC's.  Voice acting and scripting takes up such a large portion of the budget, and other resources, that it restricts many choices, including an evil storyline,

[The_Shade]

GTA is a sandbox and it doesn't cast you as The Villain™. The thing about GTA is not villainy, its chaos. Aside from basement sociopaths no one is playing GTA legitimately wandering around murdering prostitutes because they hate women. They're playing to create chaos and lunacy and deriving entertainment from upending the system then watching how the sandbox simulation reacts to their actions. 

 

I don't recall saying it did. I was responding to a post to show that games where you play as presumably an ass*** can still sell. That's all. 

[Efvie]

Older Bioware games did allow you to play as "evil" within the storyline.  Of course, that was before voice acting for every interaction with NPC's.  Voice acting and scripting takes up such a large portion of the budget, and other resources, that it restricts many choices, including an evil storyline,

 

Honestly, I think it’s more that evil just doesn’t work for continued storylines. For a single game, maybe, but not for a series.

 

Games with evil don’t really sell very well, either. Something like GTA is so detached from their reality that people don’t think about it, but funnily enough BioWare’s fantasy worlds tie much more tightly to one’s real moral compass.

 

There’s always someone who wants to play evil or *******, and though I personally don’t understand that urge at all, I don’t have anything against it. It’s just… hard to see how it could be meaningfully added.

[Xhaiden]

I don't recall saying it did. I was responding to a post to show that games where you play as presumably an ass*** can still sell. That's all. 

 

Well, playing as an ******* and playing as a legitimately evil villain are different things. I mean, you could play Shepard as a complete ******* for example. >.>

[movieguyabw]

Older Bioware games did allow you to play as "evil" within the storyline.  Of course, that was before voice acting for every interaction with NPC's.  Voice acting and scripting takes up such a large portion of the budget, and other resources, that it restricts many choices, including an evil storyline,

 

The oldest Bioware game I've played was Kotor.  That only allowed you to play "evil" at the end of the game - and I'm fairly sure that was only because a sequel was never intended.  So unless things are very different in Baldur's Gate, NWN, or Jade Empire (none of which I've actually played, myself, so I could very well be wrong) my guess would be that the games which gave you the "evil" option didn't let you play "evil" the full game.  Maybe you could play a total jerk for 90% of it - but not completely moustache-twirling "I'm going to rule the world/bathe the starways in the blood of the innocent and righteous" evil.

 

The vast majority of gamers don't actually like to play "evil" unless its in a campy humourous sense ala Dungeon Keeper. Once its presented in a serious sense few people will play it but now you're doing things and making decisions that are legitimately immoral or unethical. The fundamental problem is that in a serious game its extremely difficult to give a player a motivation to be evil. Because no matter the reason you give the player they can reason there way out of it to some degree and you can't just tell them well you're evil because you're evil. 

 

Its just human nature to be honest. 

 

You could assign the role of the villain to the PC and leave it from there though. Every Dragon Age game assigns you a role ( The Warden, The Champion, The Inquisitor ) and then leaves it up to you to navigate. So you could play it that way. Assign the role of the villain to the player and the world views them as a villain. But have their objective be something actually good or heroic that they're trying to complete while struggling against the stigma the world is imposing on them. That kind of role would be loaded with RP as you try to convince people of your intentions or utilize more unsavory elements of society to further your objectives. Ends justify the means, etc.

 

Very much this.  You could argue, however, they've already done this in Origins and Inquisition.  Origins; Loghain has most of Ferelden convinced you killed the King and are a menace to society, up until the Landsmeet.  Inquisition; the Chantry declares you a heratic, and blames you for the death of Justinia for the beginning portion of the game.  Sure, you're seen as a hero at some point in both games - but I feel like this is kind of a given.  If you start off with people thinking you're a villain, and end the game with people's opinions of you not changing in the slightest, then where's the change?  If the world doesn't change in some way from beginning to end - if it just stays stagnant - then what is the point of any of it?

[Kentaris]

I've seriously enjoyed both Origins and Inquisition with DA2 to a lesser extent. However, I've found in all three games irrespective 

of my choices whether it be helping Anders blow up the Chantry and letting him live or being a complete douche as the Warden regardless my character is still considered either a hero or champion. 

 

So rather than this continuation of being the hero saving a part of Thedas from some big bad evil, what if you could create a character who became THAT particular evil in Thedas? We already know that Tevinter is a particularly corrupt and unethical nation so it would be perfect play to kick things off. That's not to say that we could still keep the usual superficial choice system where you can make decisions but ultimately you're character's desire is one of pure darkness instead of the growing trend of picking 'evil' decisions for the greater good. 

 

You could also have companions who join and support you're evil schemes and agenda as well as companions who sign up to find you're not the person they expected etc. 

 

Probably getting ahead of myself but it would be truly epic if the potential villain from DA4 went into conflict with another hero in a future Dragon Age game although that may be asking too much. 

 

The last time a similar option was explored in Bioware games to my knowledge was in both Jade Empire and Star Wars Knights of the Old Republic which were impressive games to say the least. 

i kinda like your idea.. i have always wanted to play in Tevinter as a mage ever since i first heard of it in Dragon Age maybe not as pure evil not everyone in Tevinter is evil or  a evil mage or even a mage for that matter it would be hard to do but would have possibilities

[lil yonce]

I would like it if DA4 let the protagonist be an anti-hero. I haven't read Hamlet in a few years, but I remember it can be argued that he's a villain. I would like something like that.

[Dakota Strider]

I did not play KOTOR, but Icewind Dale, BG1&2, and the NWN series were all based on the AD&D/D&D ruleset.  So, you could set your alignment as evil at the start, and you were allowed to make evil choices throughout the game.  While you generally moved along a fairly parallel storyline, your decision affected how your companions reacted to you...or even if they wanted to stay with you.  Good companions would not tolerate you acting evil, and evil companions did not like being around those that were good.  And, companions would argue, and possibly fight each other based on alignment disagreements.  While some of the main campaign goals would be completed by both, how you completed them, and the aftermath were affected by how you played it.

[MadDemiurg]

I want the game that is evil,, ruthless and grim and racist:

• I want political intrigue and backstabbing.
• I want companions that only wait for the right moment to mess you up and stay only as long as it benefits them.
• I want to sacrifice people to summon demons. 
• I want to destroy the chantry.
• I want to build concentration camps for elves. 
• I want a ****** up ending where everyone dies

 

BW will never make it though. DA only pretends to be dark fantasy and DAI is even further from it than the previous installments. But we might get a romancable darkspawn in DA4, that I wouldn't be surprised of.