62 réponses à ce sujet

[Sartoz]

                                                                                                    <<<<<<<<<<()>>>>>>>>>>

 

You could always count on the Klingon,  Romulan, Borg for stories. These races were in the background and part of "known Federation space" , Their culture clashed with the Federation from time to time.... leading to short wars.

 

I expect ME:A to be similar, eventually.  Remember that we "just arrived" in the Cluster. Exploration will reveal new races. In the meantime, there appears to be Merc and space pirate groups to deal with.... so these may be your "villain of the week".

 

This idea has its appeal because it cleanly avoids the mess of the ME1-3 trilogy.

[capn233]

I don't really know that villain of the week works so well for a game.  A game is going to have a set ending point, unlike a series which may be running until the ratings drop off.

 

It makes more sense to have a main story arc with some smaller arcs.  And that usually means some sort of main antagonist, even if they aren't well known or characterized at the beginning.

[N7Jamaican]

I think Mass Effect needs a main villain.  However, I don't mind "villains of the week" for side quests.  Like a story within a story.

[exboomer]

I find that when it comes to certain shows and games that some of my favourite episodes were of the "villain of the week" variety. I enjoyed the witcher 3 contracts so much that I'd drop everything else upon finding a new one. We'll be pioneers in ME:A, and it's a big and uncharted galaxy. Shows such as Farscape and Startrek have filmed hundreds of hours worth of "alien of the week" type of episodes, and this is why a main villain is merely optional for a story set up like in ME:A.

Witcher 3 HAD a main villian and any good story has to have one as well. He/she/it doesn't have to be revealed right away but they do have to be in the plot somewhere.

[Killroy]

Witcher 3 HAD a main villian and any good story has to have one as well. He/she/it doesn't have to be revealed right away but they do have to be in the plot somewhere.

BS. Not every story needs a villain. Or a hero for that matter.

[mickey111]

Witcher 3 HAD a main villian and any good story has to have one as well. He/she/it doesn't have to be revealed right away but they do have to be in the plot somewhere.

 

 

Are you sure you didn't accidentally reply to the wrong person? I said nothing about a lack of villain for witcher 3, or that it shouldn't be in MEA. I think you're just jumping to conclusions, ma,king assumptions about things I didn't say. I daid nothing about withcer 3s main villain or lack of, and I said MEA having one is purely optional because of the whole frontier of an entirely uncharted galaxy, and I meant both points 100% literally. There is no reading between the lines here.

[MrFob]

While I think you can construct good stories without a main villain or hero, it's not an easy thing to do. That goes double for a game where you have added constraints on the story in terms of pacing and the proportion of action that it needs to accommodate.

 

One could even argue that hey did try to pull off a story without a main villain in ME3. Look how that ended.

 

In the end, I'd rather have a good cliched story than a bad one that tries to break out of established dogmas, just for the sake of it.

[AlanC9]

This seems like a much better fit for a Bethesda game, which doesn't come to an end so much as the player just gets bored sometime.

[Markus]

I'm with the We Need a Main Antagonist camp, though I think that antagonist should be a bit more personal.  They should be someone we distrust on sight, but otherwise seems more annoying or loathsome at first, rather than threatening.  However, as the story builds, and we keep coming into contact with them, they continue to demonstrate more and more dangerous beliefs and tendencies, until they become a clear and present threat near the end of the game.  At this point, we'll need to take them out.  This rise in threat might coincide with them gaining access to dangerous or powerful technology, or some other sharp rise in their military might.

 

This scenario would be even better if they're respected or honored by their own people, and besides being jerk***es to the Milky Way colonists/explorers, is considered a good person by their own society's standards.  Heck, they might even a quality or two that even we the players might respect, or at least allow us to understand why they are acting the way they are.

[Bad King]

I disagree. The best Mass Effect game in terms of its story was ME1, in large part because it kept the narrative focussed on the well-developed antagonist Saren as the main antagonist with the awesome Sovereign reveal being made later on which shifts attention to him as the surprise main antagonist at the end of the game. ME2 had Harbinger/The Collector General, but said antagonist lacked much depth or development, and the game ended up consisting mostly of Shepard defeating random minor villains in various off topic loyalty missions. ME3 was very incoherent in terms of who we should consider the main antagonist: half of the time I couldn't tell whether TIM/Cerberus or the Reapers were the primary antagonist in the game.

 

So rather than have frequent poorly developed miniature villains like ME2 did, I'd rather they stuck to the ME1 formula with a strong, well-developed main antagonist without descending into the incoherency of ME3. Give us a Saren or Teyrn Loghain type main antagonist: they were both brilliant. ME2 Harbinger and Corypheus meanwhile were pretty poorly developed/fleshed out.

[Kabooooom]

I've often wished for a more Metal Gear level of imposing antagonists. One of the reasons I actually don't hate Kai Leng is that at least he's one more "threatening" face. Heh.

You know what game had a ton of decent villains? Freakin' Xenogears. Man, that game. There were like 30 of 'em.

What made them decent was that they weren't actually evil. None of the villains in Xenogears were truly evil. Krelian was probably the best written villain of any game that I've seen up to now.

That game could have been a masterpiece. Instead, due to unfinishing and time constraints, it ended up halfway short. And it is still probably one of my favorite games of all time. Which says something about it - a halfway finished game can beat a hundred finished but shittier ones.

Every Sci FI and rpg fan should play xenogears.

[spinachdiaper]

ME:A's main villain is Renegade Control Shepard...I mean they have tipped their hand that the N7 in the trailer is the bad guy so I'll assume the worst case scenario is likely the truth.

[Ahglock]

ME:A's main villain is Renegade Control Shepard...I mean they have tipped their hand that the N7 in the trailer is the bad guy so I'll assume the worst case scenario is likely the truth.

 

I don't think it needs to be renegade, paragon/renegade both lead to tyranny. Give anyone absolute power and crap goes down hill fast.  I also think synthesis could be the villain.  I understand that is their preferred choice, no matter how ridiculous the idea of metamorphing the galaxy is.  All you need is a portion to escape, maybe a area where the relay had already been destroyed so the magic rays never got to them.  Now the synthetics are doing a borg routine and the colonists are trying to avoid assimilation.  Heck destroy could work where the catalyst was right and the synthetics eventually came back and started wiping out organics.  They adopted the N7 armor similar to how legion took shepards. 

 

Admittedly I think control is the most likely of the 3 by a decent margin, synthesis would be my favorite choice of the 3.