733 réponses à ce sujet

[Icinix]

BioWare doesn't do Evil / Good anymore and hasn't for quite some time.

Your two choices are Poster Child or Jerk Face.

Why I'm desperate for an actual KOTOR3.

Man - being dark side was fun.

[omgodzilla]

BioWare doesn't do Evil / Good anymore and hasn't for quite some time.

Your two choices are Poster Child or Jerk Face.

Why I'm desperate for an actual KOTOR3.

Man - being dark side was fun.

 

The inquisitor and renegade Shepard in ME3 weren't jerk faces at all. That definitely wasn't the case in ME1/ME2/DA2 but there are very few cases in DAI/ME3 where the bottom/renegade options make you look like a jerk. Sometimes, you're ruthless but you often have very good reasons for being so. 

[Sekondar]

The inquisitor and renegade Shepard in ME3 weren't jerk faces at all. That definitely was the case in ME1/ME2/DA2 but there are very few cases in DAI/ME3 where the bottom/renegade options make you look like a jerk. Sometimes, you're ruthless but you often have very good reasons for being so.

Yeah, I always felt like Renegade was so well done in ME. Felt very plausible that his way is just as, if not more, effective as Paragon.

[KainD]

The old republic has nice different morality choices.

[Vilegrim]

What are you on about? None of the forces you gather owe you any fealty. You're not the strongest leader at the end of DAO - the supposedly "evil" choices actually put you in a far weaker position. With the Circle broken the Templars are - in the immediate future - a highly professional and freestanding military force at the beck and call of the Chantry. Bhelen is a dictator with a growing army of golems that he controls absolutely using control rods, not you. Ferleden is united under the power hungry Anora. At most you have an army of werewolves, the historic enemy of all Ferelden. That's basically a new rallying cry for everyone against *you* .

At *most* you can try and claim a minor fiefdom in Ferelden that you get at the mercy of Anora, who rules unopposed.

The most saccharin LG choices make you the personal advisor to a spinless Alistair, which gives you far more power and you can claim those titles anyway. If you're a female HN you marry him and can rule as Queen, again through a spineless husband.

Eamon keeps Redcliffe no matter what, and gives up his title to Teagan anyway. Who as we've seen throughout DAO is no pushover.

You're just completely wrong about DAO. All you do with "evil" choices is empower Bhelen and give Anora a political opening to accrue power to the Crown.

Edit: Bioware doesn't retcon away the choices: it gives you the reality of what happens. The chantry says lol nope to free mages. The humans massacre the upstart elves.

 

 

amazing that their have been 3 elven genocides (it may be 34) some of which we can chose to partake in.  I want to genocide humans, sepcifically Chantry Sisters but w/e genocide is a thing that we have been allowed to do, let me switch targets.

[Vilegrim]

The inquisitor and renegade Shepard in ME3 weren't jerk faces at all. That definitely wasn't the case in ME1/ME2/DA2 but there are very few cases in DAI/ME3 where the bottom/renegade options make you look like a jerk. Sometimes, you're ruthless but you often have very good reasons for being so. 

 

 

No, the inquisitor didn't have that much available freedom, s/he was a two shades of paragon.  Hence not worth a second playthru.  Playing paladians all the time is boring, and that is what we got, no scheming, no depth, no power grabs or ambition, just bland heroics.

[In Exile]

amazing that their have been 3 elven genocides (it may be 34) some of which we can chose to partake in. I want to genocide humans, sepcifically Chantry Sisters but w/e genocide is a thing that we have been allowed to do, let me switch targets.

DAO is the only game that's allowed you to actually perpetrate what amounts to a genocide. In DA2 it's a form of self defence.

[Vilegrim]

DAO is the only game that's allowed you to actually perpetrate what amounts to a genocide. In DA2 it's a form of self defence.

 

 

it lets you manipulate things so it turns out that way tho, so you fig leaf it into a 'form of self defence' but it is a fig leaf at best, something to keep your companions mollified.

[Hazegurl]

Pretty sure letting the quarians get vaporized is the paragon choice.

 

Least I recall whining about that.

I think you're right. There was so much fighting about it in the forum to the point where it's all just one big blob of opinions to me now. 

[In Exile]

it lets you manipulate things so it turns out that way tho, so you fig leaf it into a 'form of self defence' but it is a fig leaf at best, something to keep your companions mollified.

No, it doesn't. That's just your head cannon. In DA2 you get accosted by a group of armed adult elves who you have to talk down.

In DAO you convince the werewolves who so desperately want to be human to kill and convert all of the Dalish in the forest. That's definitionally genocide.

[omgodzilla]

No, the inquisitor didn't have that much available freedom, s/he was a two shades of paragon.  Hence not worth a second playthru.  Playing paladians all the time is boring, and that is what we got, no scheming, no depth, no power grabs or ambition, just bland heroics.

 

I agree that the inquisitor was way too tame. I was mostly referring to the execution options in the judgements, and that dude you can kill on Vivienne's recruitment quest. Its funny that even in ME3, I felt I had alot more freedom despite there being so much autodialogue. There is a very noticeable lack of interesting moral choices in DAI. 

[DuskWanderer]

Why would anyone put an evil person in charge, even if they could seal the tifts. That's why you can't be evil. There is a sense of realism in this game: People won't follow an evil ******.

[Eldial3los]

Too all the people that say that you can't be evil because people would not follow you?

 

And Hitler was what before becoming the fuhrer?

 

*He is random dude that joined German's worker party and quietly raised to power  because of this soft skills, manipulations and cunning.

*He changed the party name to Nationalist German worker aka Nazi

*He convinced the people and government that Germany needed to be rule with authority and extreme nationanlism.

*They bullied  every one until they gained the majority of the political support to win the election around 1933 (If I'm correct)

*And if you've watched documentaries , a lot of people knew nothing of all the bullying, blackmailing the Nazi party was doing in secret. (People though the idea of the party was good not the killing but the general idea. They were manipulated into voting for the Nazi)

* And when they took power and ruled with iron fist, it was too late for people.

* Hitler replaced everyone or imprisoned that could have paused a problem to him, he basically surrounded himself and government official with people that would agree with him.

 

Why did people not stop following Hitler when he started evading and killing people early world war 2? People were scared, people or high official were bribed, the people that objected were killed or imprisoned. The rest were manipulated into believing in his crazy fantasy.

 

Why can't the Inquisitor do the same thing?  Manipulate everyone to become the inquisitor with the largest army and rule the land with  group of trusted confident hungry for power? And what about the genocide in Africa? People followed evil people or even terrorist? Evil people are master at manipulating others into believing their own ideas or agendas.

 

You might thing that everyone is courageous but history has proven us that personal interest and preservation will allow someone to do  horrible things in order to stay alive or become rich.

[BubbleDncr]

My 2nd DA:O playthrough was evil. As was my 2nd DA2 playthrough - my only complaint being that my Evil Hawke got way too emotional about leaving her sister to die in the deep roads. 

 

I have no yet done my evil DA:I playthrough yet (on my 3rd), and it's not planned for anytime soon, simply because it doesn't seem like an evil playthrough is an option. Which is a shame, I really enjoyed being evil in all the other Bioware games. 

 

Best I can think is if you choose to make your Inquisition about "power" and to execute everyone you have to pass judgement on. Even most dialog options don't seem to have a "rude jerk" response. 

[omgodzilla]

Why would anyone put an evil person in charge, even if they could seal the tifts. That's why you can't be evil. There is a sense of realism in this game: People won't follow an evil ******.

 

Joseph Stalin says hi

 

Not that I want to be like Stalin exactly but there is ALOT the inquisitor could get away with. 

[Hazegurl]

No one would follow an evil leader?

 

Pick up a history book, folks. People have been doing that since societies began to form.

[VanguardCharge]

Can't agree with OP more. Ruthless, self agenda based role play is my favourite type of role playing in RPG. DA:O allowed us to become more powerful with optional quests lines (Reaver, Blood Mage Specialization, Warden Keep DLC). Hell, OGB was an excellent dark choice. DA:2 toned it down, but we were still able to play as a selfish Hawk. In DA:I we only had one option, a Disney hero. 

 

Seriously, what was the "darkest" choice we could make? Let Celene die or let the Chargers die? Pfft. I want to sacrifice Hawk/Grey Wardens to ally with the Nightmare Fear demon. I want the option to be a fricken blood mage. I want to sell Sera to a noble who she fucks over. None of this would break the game or the story. 

[Examurai]

Joseph Stalin says hi

 

Not that I want to be like Stalin exactly but there is ALOT the inquisitor could get away with. 

 

 

No one would follow an evil leader?

 

Pick up a history book, folks. People have been doing that since societies began to form.

 

From our perspective we may consider them evil, but from their followers perspective, they are considered heroes.

 

So I truly believe no one would actually follow an 'evil' leader. 

[Joseph Warrick]

BioWare doesn't do Evil / Good anymore and hasn't for quite some time.

Your two choices are Poster Child or Jerk Face.

Why I'm desperate for an actual KOTOR3.

Man - being dark side was fun.

Please. Kotor had so many over the top lolevil lines there is a mod to tone them down so you don't sound* like a moron. If you don't like Jerkface, dark side kotor is not a game for you.

*figuratively speaking

[omgodzilla]

From our perspective we may consider them evil, but from their followers perspective, they are considered heroes.

 

So I truly believe no one would actually follow an 'evil' leader. 

 

And why does it have to be any different for the inquisitor? The most successful tyrants are the ones that convince people they aren't tyrants at all. 

 

Oh and the reason most people followed Stalin is because they were absolutely scared shitless of him. The dude would kill anyone who even looked at him wrong. The ones who weren't scared of him were basically brainwashed through propaganda. I don't see why we couldn't also be a brutal tyrant who uses fear and propaganda to keep him or herself in power. 

[SkyKing]

You can't be evil in this game.  Even though Bioware had the used car salesman lying mentality to compare DAI to game of thrones, there are no Jeoffrey choices in judging people. The most evil thing you can do in this game is turn down every advance Dorian makes for your hieney. If you miss one flirt with Cassandra, Josephine, etc, then you don't get a 2nd chance, but Dorian always wants access to your hieney and every dialogue bioware is daring you to click that heart option so dorian can jump into your hieney.  So according to bioware, evil is being a bigot by not allowing dorian to have his way with your hieney. 

[Sekondar]

Can't agree with OP more. Ruthless, self agenda based role play is my favourite type of role playing in RPG. DA:O allowed us to become more powerful with optional quests lines (Reaver, Blood Mage Specialization, Warden Keep DLC). Hell, OGB was an excellent dark choice. DA:2 toned it down, but we were still able to play as a selfish Hawk. In DA:I we only had one option, a Disney hero.

Seriously, what was the "darkest" choice we could make? Let Celene die or let the Chargers die? Pfft. I want to sacrifice Hawk/Grey Wardens to ally with the Nightmare Fear demon. I want the option to be a fricken blood mage. I want to sell Sera to a noble who she fucks over. None of this would break the game or the story.

I agree, but I'd like to add, that the Well of Sorrows choice was nice, as well. I mean, that one could be done with personal power in mind.

[Hazegurl]

From our perspective we may consider them evil, but from their followers perspective, they are considered heroes.

 

So I truly believe no one would actually follow an 'evil' leader. 

True. It just shows that you can convince millions of people that your particular brand of "evil" is okay as long as they benefit from it somehow. That's nearly the bases of every powerful country, religion, and corporation in the world.

[Sekondar]

You can't be evil in this game. Even though Bioware had the used car salesman lying mentality to compare DAI to game of thrones, there are no Jeoffrey choices in judging people. The most evil thing you can do in this game is turn down every advance Dorian makes for your hieney. If you miss one flirt with Cassandra, Josephine, etc, then you don't get a 2nd chance, but Dorian always wants access to your hieney and every dialogue bioware is daring you to click that heart option so dorian can jump into your hieney. So according to bioware, evil is being a bigot by not allowing dorian to have his way with your hieney.

Didn't feel like Dorian was all that bad, tbh.