4635 réponses à ce sujet

[Donk]

Do you ever walk out into the world and discover disturbingly large masses of humanity born without a sense of humor

People on the BSN are terribly dull.

[nightscrawl]

^ Uhm... considering the amount of name-calling and pettiness that has actually gone on in this thread, I don't see why "they were only kidding" was the default view. Perhaps Addictress is known for that sort of thing, I haven't paid that much attention; we're over 60 pages now. If that's the case, then great. My initial perception was the same as Witch Cocktor's.

[midnight tea]

I'll start by saying that I do agree with your general premise here. BUT I'm reluctant to put such reliance on a game mechanic like approval, particularly since that is contingent on bringing Solas along in the party and completing those quests with him present.

Perhaps the player just speeds though the plot and doesn't do many side quests, or perhaps they don't bring Solas along for whatever reason (I use Dorian as my go-to mage). The limited size of the party, as well as a decent selection of mages (Solas, Dorian, Vivienne, and potentially the player) increases the likelihood that this is the case in any given play.

The same can be said of any sort of banter that might be revealing, whether about Solas or any other character. The player might have had banter troubles, or simply didn't bring along the party makeup to hear whatever revealing banters.

That's not to say that that important or revealing information isn't there, because it is, or that those same things aren't true (Solas approving helping peasants), because they are, but it's entirely reasonable that a player might have certain views of Solas based on what they didn't see and hear in their own game.

I don't think this aspect of it has anything to do with Solas as a character, but with a flaw in the game's design. If PW, or any writer, meant for those clues to be seen and heard to give the character more nuance, then they should have chosen a better delivery device.

I can say the same about any of the banter reveals, particularly those involving Cole reading the followers. Many of those are quite significant, but you wouldn't have heard them in some cases. I know I didn't in my first play because I never brought him anywhere (dealing with squishy rogues is not my thing).
 
 

 
I find this to be very sad.

 

I'd say that this is a somewhat wrong way to look at it - DA universe was actually designed around the fact that we will NOT have full information about certain aspects of the universe or story no matter how exhaustive a single playthrough is.

 

And so, the replayability of the game has became an intentional device to tell a story. It has been like this since DAO, even since first minutes of the game - we don't, for example, know much about Harrowing if you don't play through mage origins. We don't really know who really Howe is or what he's done if we don't play with a Cousland. We have limited perspective on the plight of Casteless or city elves if we don't play with Brosca or Tabris. Some of the information relies on what route we pick, or what quest we decide to do. Even characters sort of are given additional depth, since we can see different reactions to characters with different approval level or outcome of quests, or even party composition.

 

Basically, the story has been constructed to be this giant, non-linear puzzle that relies on player's willingness to replay it and perhaps also grab external sources to get the full picture.

 

Now, I can see why people can be frustrated with it. Especially that it's not a usual way to tell a story, which we are used to treat as self-contained and expect information to be given for us without necessity to re-watch or replay and consider it a well-told story. But... let me just say that I as a person who usually replays games anyway (or re-watches movies or rereads books or comics to find missing things and so on) and frequently reaches for additional materials if I'm interested with something can't help to thoroughly enjoy that aspect of games like Dragon Age, or (in somewhat limited fashion) Elder Scrolls I love the fact that I can play the game, and it will not be the same and I may discover more about the story or character if only I modify the playthrough. I like that my perspective can change if I learn more. It's almost like a living thing

[dawnstone]

Do you ever walk out into the world and discover disturbingly large masses of humanity born without a sense of humor

I think it comes with the self-loathing that is required to constantly pursue internet arguments over something one hates. I mean, why not just go hit your fingers with a hammer, at least there will be tangible results.   

[midnight tea]

'' You people hate Solas, that must mean you're jealous of him!!!!! JUELLY HATERS!!! ''

 

Are we in kindergarten? Seriously? This is what you people resort to?

Give me a freaking break...

 

Eh, it says a lot about a person if they even take a silly remark like it's a serious slight OR think that people were super-serious...

[midnight tea]

^ Uhm... considering the amount of name-calling and pettiness that has actually gone on in this thread, I don't see why "they were only kidding" was the default view. Perhaps Addictress is known for that sort of thing, I haven't paid that much attention; we're over 60 pages now. If that's the case, then great. My initial perception was the same as Witch Cocktor's.

 

Yes, but the accusation of being jealous of a fictional character and their popularity is so out of left field that the Poe status is sticking out even in comparison to other more bizarre (or serious) accusations.

[nightscrawl]

I'd say that this is a somewhat wrong way to look at it - DA universe was actually designed around the fact that we will NOT have full information about certain aspects of the universe or story no matter how exhaustive a single playthrough is.
 
And so, the replayability of the game has became an intentional device to tell a story. It has been like this since DAO, even since first minutes of the game - we don't, for example, know much about Harrowing if you don't play through mage origins. We don't really know who really Howe is or what he's done if we don't play with a Cousland. We have limited perspective on the plight of Casteless or city elves if we don't play with Brosca or Tabris. Some of the information relies on what route we pick, or what quest we decide to do. Even characters sort of are given additional depth, since we can see different reactions to characters with different approval level or outcome of quests, or even party composition.
 
Basically, the story has been constructed to be this giant, non-linear puzzle that relies on player's willingness to replay it and perhaps also grab external sources to get the full picture.
 
Now, I can see why people can be frustrated with it. Especially that it's not a usual way to tell a story, which we are used to treat as self-contained and expect information to be given for us without necessity to re-watch or replay and consider it a well-told story. But... let me just say that I as a person who usually replays games anyway (or re-watches movies or rereads books or comics to find missing things and so on) and frequently reaches for additional materials if I'm interested with something can't help to thoroughly enjoy that aspect of games like Dragon Age, or (in somewhat limited fashion) Elder Scrolls I love the fact that I can play the game, and it will not be the same and I may discover more about the story or character if only I modify the playthrough. I like that my perspective can change if I learn more. It's almost like a living thing

I understand all that and I can appreciate that aspect of the games as well; there are all of these hidden things there, in the games themselves and in related ancillary materials, that enrich the story in an incredible way.

However, I don't think that any player's view is any less valid because they haven't played the game multiple times, with multiple paths, or absorbed outside materials and developer quotes. I think it's especially important to consider this in light of the fact that many people don't even finish the game a single time, or if they do finish, they don't play again. We on the BSN are in the minority. These same people will have their view of Solas, or whatever other story aspect, and play DA4 with those views.

 

People like Solas for these reasons, other people dislike Solas for those reasons. It's all perception based on what you saw and heard in the game.

 

There was another thread some time ago, not really related to Solas, where someone mentioned that they had distrust of him shortly after meeting. I asked why and they explained that it was based on the various investigate options, particularly those about the Fade, that are available upon reaching Haven. I didn't look at the conversation in the same way as that person, but that is their view. I can't find fault with it, it's just different than my own perception of the same conversation. I never had any suspicions of Solas whatsoever and was completely surprised by his sudden disappearance, to say nothing of the post-credit scene; I sat there with my mouth hanging open, much in the same way that I did when Anders blew up the chantry.

 

 

Yes, but the accusation of being jealous of a fictional character and their popularity is so out of left field that the Poe status is sticking out even in comparison to other more bizarre (or serious) accusations.

 

"Poe status"? That's a new one for me.

[dawnstone]

"Poe status"? That's a new one for me.

I think she means Poe's Law. Basically without an indication of intent or knowing the person on the other end it can be hard to determine whether something is meant to be serious or a parody.

[Donk]

^ Uhm... considering the amount of name-calling and pettiness that has actually gone on in this thread, I don't see why "they were only kidding" was the default view. Perhaps Addictress is known for that sort of thing, I haven't paid that much attention; we're over 60 pages now. If that's the case, then great. My initial perception was the same as Witch Cocktor's.

All about perspective really. And yeah, I don't really take anything seriously that Addictress says. No offence to her, but I find she is often humorous.

Mind you, I don't really take anything on here seriously. Petty name-calling indeed. Don't see the need to relate every single real world problem with DA (a work of fiction).

[Fiskrens]

I understand all that and I can appreciate that aspect of the games as well; there are all of these hidden things there, in the games themselves and in related ancillary materials, that enrich the story in an incredible way.
However, I don't think that any player's view is any less valid because they haven't played the game multiple times, with multiple paths, or absorbed outside materials and developer quotes. I think it's especially important to consider this in light of the fact that many people don't even finish the game a single time, or if they do finish, they don't play again. We on the BSN are in the minority. These same people will have their view of Solas, or whatever other story aspect, and play DA4 with those views.
 
People like Solas for these reasons, other people dislike Solas for those reasons. It's all perception based on what you saw and heard in the game.

Basing one's beliefs only on what's self-experienced quickly becomes very limited*, and is the basis of a lot of prejudice. It's only natural to rank such knowledge highest, but today's world kind of requires you to take into account other people's findings (with references).

*=understatement

[Witch Cocktor]

Do you ever walk out into the world and discover disturbingly large masses of humanity born without a sense of humor

 

It's easy to point and laugh when someone misses the  '' OBVIOUS '' joke, but it's harder to accept that maybe your joke and the delivery of that joke sucked.

I think this is just telling of how I view Solas' fans since I didn't catch that joke.

[midnight tea]

Is Kieran a mage? And is non-OGB Kieran a mage? And is formerly-OGB Kieran a mage?

 

No idea. But given that both his grandma and his mom are powerful mages sort of increases Kieran's chances to actually be one.

 

Hey, you're responding to the person who (IIRC) argued that Josephine and Cullen's romances didn't make sense/were unhealthy because through their logic, you couldn't spend "enough" time with them for them to "make sense" or be "healthy" or "realistic". So I don't find it surprising that they'd say something similar about Solas. It's nonsense of course, as you've already pointed out. It's also nonsense for Josephine and Cullen, so it would be much, much more nonsensical for someone who not only travels with you, but can also hang out with you when you're sleeping, romance or no. There is plenty of time for them to spend together. Seriously.

 

If that indeed happened I can only shake my head at it, really. I mean... what about movies? Most of them at best last 1,5-3 hours and we're left only to judge character and their interaction in such short timeframe... Even books aren't better, because at best it takes as a few days to a week to read them, which is not "realistic" compared to... well... reality. And does this mean that every character that was written ever is 'unhealthy' or has 'unhealthy' relationships with other 'unrealistic' characters  ?

Geez, I never thought that I'd see such large misunderstanding of principles of storytelling. Even if only on sub-conscious level most people, including children, know that there exists something like suspension of disbelief and we have to apply it in order to enjoy any fictional world, which includes RPG games.

 

Large and long as they can be, they can't possibly include "realistic" amounts of LI or companion interactions, even if for budget reasons. Barring some minor fluff for immersion and without going into analysis on writer's choice on execution of their ideas, most of the well-constructed stories show us things in limited scope and mostly of things that are, for one reason or another, relevant to the story or intended portrayal.

 

The argument can be made that perhaps we've not seen enough to get a good picture, we'd like to see more, or there are issues with what we've seen, but not that the amount of time we spend with character means that that's ALL we have between characters in-universe, and that means that their relationship is unhealthy or LI "doesn't have time for us". That's just ridiculous.

 

And it's especially ridiculous in context of Solas and the limited scope of his romance, especially if a person claims that's ALL we have, because it's all we see on screen... only to claim that the in-game reason for it is that Solas has no time for Lavellan, because he prefers activities like 'playing da-Vinci', practicing spell-casting or secretly plotting apocalypse.

 

....Which, I'd like to point out, are things we never see on screen!!

 

The bias here is so heavy it basically produces its own black hole that sucks all the IQ in its vicinity.

 

Eh... TBH, for me this whole thing is simply a case of begging the question done by someone who will try and use anything to justify the premise without really thinking it through or thinking about how it makes them look in eyes of anyone who is capable of applying even basic logic.

 

And we have other examples of it in the thread to sadly conclude that this is a pretty consistent occurrence and not separated incidents. My "favorite" is the rampant hypocrisy of accusing the "opposition" of using external information to supplement their argument and support their viewpoint, only to turn 5 seconds later and indiscriminately use factors external to the story or the universe to create possibly the most inane arguments in the thread. 

 

"I only base my opinion on in game facts and unlike some I don't rely on metagame like word of author or headcanon/fanfiction to believe deluded things about a character!"

 

.... which is followed by immediately turning on a heel and basing opinion on character on obvious headcanon AND using obscure metagame information like cutscene count or lenght of time we see things on screen, or vaguest possibility of retcon to make bizarre claims about characters or story, which includes my absolute favorite thing to the date: "Oh, that Solas's plan only worked because of plot armor! ...Which in context of what was discussed logically means that Solas must have - in universe! - relied on metagame himself and used the fact that the player can never lose main campaign to make his plan work without a hitch, which invalidates his success rate, take THAT Solas lovers!"

 

Which is like... there's just no going around it: this is probably one of the stupidest things I've read not just in the thread or BSN forum, but entire Internet to date  Which is an achievement that deserves some sort of prize. Like "brain collapsing on itself" badge or something.

[nightscrawl]

Basing one's beliefs only on what's self-experienced quickly becomes very limited*, and is the basis of a lot of prejudice. It's only natural to rank such knowledge highest, but today's world kind of requires you to take into account other people's findings (with references).

*=understatement

We're not talking about the real world, we're talking about people's perceptions of a video game character.
 
If we're going to be real here, yes, of course it's important to consider the perspectives of other people, particularly those that have different life experiences from your own, but we know that isn't the case for many. One of the best examples of this are the many people who have a shift in LGBT rights after their child or other family member comes out to them, then suddenly those issues are brought into their world in a personal way. We can talk about the ideal way for people to think and behave all day long, but it doesn't change the way they actually do think and behave.

[Almostfaceman]

I understand all that and I can appreciate that aspect of the games as well; there are all of these hidden things there, in the games themselves and in related ancillary materials, that enrich the story in an incredible way.

However, I don't think that any player's view is any less valid because they haven't played the game multiple times, with multiple paths, or absorbed outside materials and developer quotes. I think it's especially important to consider this in light of the fact that many people don't even finish the game a single time, or if they do finish, they don't play again. We on the BSN are in the minority. These same people will have their view of Solas, or whatever other story aspect, and play DA4 with those views.

 

People like Solas for these reasons, other people dislike Solas for those reasons. It's all perception based on what you saw and heard in the game.

 

There was another thread some time ago, not really related to Solas, where someone mentioned that they had distrust of him shortly after meeting. I asked why and they explained that it was based on the various investigate options, particularly those about the Fade, that are available upon reaching Haven. I didn't look at the conversation in the same way as that person, but that is their view. I can't find fault with it, it's just different than my own perception of the same conversation. I never had any suspicions of Solas whatsoever and was completely surprised by his sudden disappearance, to say nothing of the post-credit scene; I sat there with my mouth hanging open, much in the same way that I did when Anders blew up the chantry.

 

 

If this were a story appreciation class, or art appreciation class, where everyone is sitting in a circle and all they have to contribute is what they think of the piece of art or the story... this limited perception is fine. There's no expectation for investigation. There are no questions, analysis. No who what when where why.

 

But in a discussion about different perceptions and why those perceptions are different... analysis is called for. 

 

For example, a person reads a poem. They only read the poem once and they miss half of the poem because the pages of their book are glued together. That person begins a discussion with another person who's read the whole poem and they say, "Yes, the work was beautiful, it made me feel as if I happily floated down among the branches of the cherry tree, taking in the scent ,the falling leaves, the gentle breeze, the colors of the fruit contrasted with the leaves and branches...." and then the other person looks on in shock and says "... but what about the dead body rotting at the base of the tree? Maggots wriggling and stench blotting out the sweetness of the fragrant fruit?"

 

See? Having more knowledge about the work adds more to the experience and can change that initial experience. 

 

The title of the thread is "Why ... like?" So that person you speak of who had one play-through and was suspicious of Solas, if they want to be in the discussion they then have to be willing to investigate and learn more from others in the discussion. Let's say they have missed that part where Solas says he hates tea. So their experience has limited value in the discussion. They have to be willing to explore and take in more information. If they're not, if they just sit there with their one play-through and argue the whole time that Solas doesn't like tea... they may as well not participate at all. They have nothing worth while to add. 

[nightscrawl]

See? Having more knowledge about the work adds more to the experience and can change that initial experience.

I don't disagree and I acknowledged that in the first paragraph of what I wrote. I personally have played the games numerous times, absorb the ancillary materials, read forum posts and have changed views based on them, and so on.

I've said my peace and am done with the issue now.

[midnight tea]

It's easy to point and laugh when someone misses the  '' OBVIOUS '' joke, but it's harder to accept that maybe your joke and the delivery of that joke sucked.

I think this is just telling of how I view Solas' fans since I didn't catch that joke.

 

Heh, the joke sucking or not wasn't even an issue here, but the readiness to use it as more of an ammunition against them. Which... yes, it does tell of your perspective on people, but that in itself sort of speaks more of yourself than the people. Either way, it's no point to linger on it, all of it is a silly thing. Though if the thread is going to continue I'd have to keep reminding myself to telegraph every attempt at levity, bad or no  ...

[maia0407]

Do you ever walk out into the world and discover disturbingly large masses of humanity born without a sense of humor

No, curiously enough, not out in the real world. But I wandered into this thread and found all of them here. *phew* Mystery of the missing grouches solved!

[midnight tea]

I understand all that and I can appreciate that aspect of the games as well; there are all of these hidden things there, in the games themselves and in related ancillary materials, that enrich the story in an incredible way.

However, I don't think that any player's view is any less valid because they haven't played the game multiple times, with multiple paths, or absorbed outside materials and developer quotes. I think it's especially important to consider this in light of the fact that many people don't even finish the game a single time, or if they do finish, they don't play again. We on the BSN are in the minority. These same people will have their view of Solas, or whatever other story aspect, and play DA4 with those views.

 

People like Solas for these reasons, other people dislike Solas for those reasons. It's all perception based on what you saw and heard in the game.

 

There was another thread some time ago, not really related to Solas, where someone mentioned that they had distrust of him shortly after meeting. I asked why and they explained that it was based on the various investigate options, particularly those about the Fade, that are available upon reaching Haven. I didn't look at the conversation in the same way as that person, but that is their view. I can't find fault with it, it's just different than my own perception of the same conversation. I never had any suspicions of Solas whatsoever and was completely surprised by his sudden disappearance, to say nothing of the post-credit scene; I sat there with my mouth hanging open, much in the same way that I did when Anders blew up the chantry.

 

 

I understand that and I understand that people have different perspective, absolutely. In fact I'd say that I really enjoy the fact that people have different perspective that relies on a fact that they've had a different playthgrough or didn't read auxillary material, or didn't inform themselves on the matter, because it's fascinating to watch how our view can be influenced, even if simply by lack of information or different interpretation of that information or any other reason I didn't mention.

 

I'd even say that I am genuinely looking forward to DA4 in part because I can't wait to see what will be a reaction of people to Fen'Harel - especially the newcomers to the franchise, who (even if BW would do a lot to explain the past events) naturally would have limited information or perspective on the story. Same way I can't wait to see how my own perspective will change depending on future reveals. It's one of reasons why I'm cheering for BW and one of (meta) reasons why I like Solas, or any character whose interpretation is in large part reliant on knowing the story or its details.

 

But I also wouldn't say that that's an issue here. That people have different perspective on story like DA is sort of a given.

What is a point of contention - or a reason to make me sad, personally - is that some people don't come to the discussion open-minded enough to consider that their perspective might be limited, be it through intentional or unintentional omission of details. Their perspective on how they view the story is valid, by all means - but yet, they don't accept the validity of other players, deem as little as fact that someone likes a character as a symptom of problems with their RL character or reasoning skills, OR the validity of the statement that both them and us might have to wait for more information to make definite judgement. 

 

I suspect it requires some level of maturity and awareness that what they have may not be the full(er) picture - and I know that this isn't always pleasant to have our point of view challenged. It's not that I'm perfect in that regard, but I do make attempts to stay open-minded, which includes this particular matter. It's not like it's a big problem for me to concede that Solas may or may not yet turn into, basically, Corypheus 2.0 - I have good reasons to suspect that he won't, but truth is we don't yet know everything, or if even BW would be able to tell the story they want - or, you know, do it well, or up to my tastes, which is a possibility I cannot exclude if I want to stay intellectually honest with myself. 

 

But I do come on these forums, flawed as they are, to discuss things and it makes me sad that oftentimes turns into bickering over 'who is right' or 'who said what' or 'us vs. them' sort of thing. I fully admit that I get distracted by it probably too often, instead of focusing on more productive things, but I'd like to say that I appreciate that the discussion still happens and that we push through with some interesting discussion points and speculations amongst some more distracting content

 

"Poe status"? That's a new one for me.

 

What I mean is Poe's Law, which...even has a wikpedia page, huh: https://en.wikipedia.../wiki/Poe's_law

 

What times to live in

[midnight tea]

No, curiously enough, not out in the real world. But I wandered into this thread and found all of them here. *phew* Mystery of the missing grouches solved!

 

So we have gremlins* and grouches.

 

And it seems we're mortal enemies... Is this a fight to end all fights? Is this is how our universe will end  !?

 

*(a humorous description for in-story "not-people" which eventually was adapted by some Solas fans to be a description of themselves)

[IllustriousT]

Prime example how miscommunication happens so easily:

 

Some of you understood Addictress' remark as being both funny and about jealously.

Some of you understood Addictress' remark as not being funny and a immature stab at the opposition about jealously.

 

I thought Addictress' remark was a funny description of the colorless nature of the argument - black and white, because gelatin is colorless. So, yea...I thought Addictress was calling people Jelly - as in gelatin. 

 

So funny . 

[nightscrawl]

^ I like that interpretation the best.

[Medhia_Nox]

I don't know, but I'm guessing something along the lines of:

jelly that Solas has as large of a fanbase as he does, despite his faults

jelly that Solas has earned an adoring fanbase that are willing to jump to his defense.

jelly that Solas, an apostate hobo that you may hate, is an ancient elvhen god who has become important to the story

 

Idk. Something like that. Maybe. I genuinely don't know for certain. But those are my guesses. 

 

1)  Degenerates have large fanbases.  It's not that big a deal.  Walter White... Dexter... Jim Jones.  A fan base means nothing. 

 

Sure, "some" fans will like him because of his flaws.  Others will like him in spite of his flaws.  Some will indeed be "silly fan girls/boys".  Others will believe his flaws give him gravitas.  The very fact that no two people will be fans of Solas for exactly the same reason makes any consideration of those fans pointless. 

 

NOTE:  The same goes for his haters.  If I could amass more haters - it does not make my position correct.  All that can be said is that:  "I have managed to amass more people that claim to dislike/hate Solas than like him."  No other value or meaning can be extrapolated from that. 

 

2) Fans always jump to the defense of the thing they like.  Christians jump to the defense of Jesus.  Sports fans will jump to the defense of their favorite team.  Patriots will jump to the defense of their country.  

 

A fan is biased.  I'm not sure why I would trust someone that says:  "Jesus is the greatest." or "The Giants are the best." - because, they too, can provide me with a laundry list of factoids that "prove" their claim.  

 

NOTE:  A hater is biased too.  The point is not to be unbiased... not a single person is ever unbiased - it is impossible for a being with an ego to be unbiased.  Unbiased is for calculators and computers. 

 

3)  For myself - I knew he was a danger from the first time I had a conversation with him in Haven.  Having experienced the likes of Zathrian, Uldred, Jowan, Orsino and Anders... I have a very low opinion of DA mages.  I consider most of them to be unstable radicals who's power outstretches their morality.  

 

I don't hate him because he's The Dread Wolf.  For myself, I was vindicated. My dislike for the character are all about his actions (and the railroading of his story).  Is that what you mean perhaps?  That we're upset he was elevated in importance?  

The only thing I will be upset about concerning his importance is if I'm forced to "redeem" him in the next game.  I cannot conceive of any character I would make that would take that route because of how I perceive it.  At best... I would be willing to strip Solas of all his power and let him live the rest of his days a mortal elf - and even that is a dangerous stretch and grossly irresponsible for any character I would make. 

[Donquijote and 59 others]

Oh, I'm not negating that they might or might not have planned what to do with OBG 100% form start to finish

It was planned.
The OGB plotline was developed to teach to players that elven powers belong to the elves and that those humans like Morrigan who try to stole those powers in the end will gain nothing but to serve the gods.

[midnight tea]

It was planned.
The OGB plotline was developed to teach to players that elven powers belong to the elves and that those humans like Morrigan who try to stole those powers in the end will gain nothing but to serve the gods.

 

Not buying it. OGB Kieran himself calls Morrigan the Inheritor who awaits the new age and Flemeth in DAO calls her one she values above everything.

[German Soldier]

I don't know, but I'm guessing something along the lines of:

jelly that Solas has as large of a fanbase as he does, despite his faults

jelly that Solas has earned an adoring fanbase that are willing to jump to his defense.

jelly that Solas, an apostate hobo that you may hate, is an ancient elvhen god who has become important to the story

 

Idk. Something like that. Maybe. I genuinely don't know for certain. But those are my guesses.

In history  we had Megalomaniacs

Who had a large fanbase despite their flaws

Who earned an adoring fanbase that were willing to jump at their defense

Who believed themselves to be  guides and become important to history

 

If i dislike them it does not mean that i'm just jelly.