37 réponses à ce sujet

[TheAtomicSurvivor]

So, I was addressing this in another thread. But the only villain I feel has some form of humanity, and I am not even asking for sympathetic villains. Was Alexius. I felt his plight, even if he was a complete and total dick about it. The reasons and motivations for what he did, were actually warranted. They were an extremely grounded, realistic, reason why someone might be willing to sacrifice everything for one person. 

 

So, what happened in the writing design for the other villains?

 

Corypheus comes off mostly comical. I want to destroy the world and become a god. Okay, so stereotypical, and there's nothing about him that actually makes me like him not even as a villain. And you can write a villain that someone likes, without making him a good or sympathetic person. 

 

 

Lucius was a disappointment. And I am not going to go into Denam because he was corrupted. But Lucius we met in Val Royeux was an envy demon, that's why he was just a dickhole, and har har. But he has not redeemable value, as we enter Cassandra's interpersonal quest to find the Lord Seeker himself. Instead we get another typical, I am evil because I did this for the greater good and sacrifice my whole order cliche. Where's something more impact and intriguing. Where's the humanity in this character?

 

 

Floriane has no humanity. She's just another cunning and manipulative liar who wanted to take her brother down with her for Corypheus. Typical assassin, promised something, going to be thrown away. And she lacked any sense of humanity or something to ground her. I am not asking for sympathetic villains again. I am just asking for believable people. They just come straight out of Fantasy Villain 101.

 

Samson also comes off as laughable, Disney Cartoon villain. I mean he has a little redemption during the Sit in Judgment, but to be honest he just comes off as, look at me I have "ultimate power". 

 

I think Carpnia is okay, but she's also just shallow and lacks any characterization at all. But at least she's reasonable and stops fighting you with dialogue choices. Either way though she just comes off just as shallow. 

 

And I know the argument will be "But the Codexes..." okay, and? Does that mean the game couldn't have represented more complexities in this characters? It's like all characterization and good writing was scrapped for most of these villains. 

 

[thats1evildude]

Corypheus actually DOESN'T want to destroy the world. He thinks that Thedas needs a god, and that becoming one will be to everyone's benefit.

 

Calpernia has a fair bit of characterization if you do her personal quest.

 

Envy is a ham, but to be fair, that's par for the course with demons.

[TheAtomicSurvivor]

Corypheus actually DOESN'T want to destroy the world. He thinks that Thedas needs a god, and that becoming one will be to everyone's benefit.

 

Calpernia has a fair bit of characterization if you do her personal quest.

 

Envy is a ham, but to be fair, that's par for the course with demons.

 

I want to become a God, again isn't necessarily very nuanced either.

 

And I did Calpernia's quest. Just....again it was decent, but nothing noteworthy.

[Dai Grepher]

Ser Ruth, technically. She murdered fellow Wardens, and knew it was wrong. She tries to make up for it by turning herself over to the Inquisitor for justice, and believes execution is the only fitting punishment. You can also decide her fate in various ways. In the Chantry version she can either find faith, fight for the cause, or be left alone. In the Warden version she answers her Calling early and is honored by the dwarves. You can send her back to the Wardens and tell her to suck it up. Or you can imprison her and let her live with her guilt. I picked the last one, because that was most fitting, and I was hoping there would be more to it afterward. Like it would spark a conversation with Cole or Blackwall. Or that maybe she would come around eventually and want to atone for what she did by fighting for what's right again.

Servis was a decent villain. In it for the profit and also for the historical interest. Walking a dangerous line between an ultimate evil and a righteous force. It's fitting that you can either kill him while he's unconscious or take him prisoner. Then you can choose to send him back to Corypheus, which sums up the situation he put himself in. Either die against the Inquisition, or fail and be spared by the good guys only to be destroyed by your unforgiving boss. I like that he immediately throws himself at the mercy of the Inquisition, because he realizes his situation. It's also ballsy that he will still attempt to steal from you just to see if you're the kind to have blind trust or not. Best mage-thief of the series so far, not counting my secondary HoF of course.

I liked Florienne, actually. She's kind of cute for a 54-year-old, and still so agile. I recruit her and take a risk with her. I figure she can't go back to Corypheus at that point anyway, and stabbing the Inquisition in the back will only make her life worse. So it was a fairly safe risk. Her motive was kind of weak when you get down to it. I think it's because she was bored. She was probably also feeling old and irrelevant. So an ancient evil wants to remake the world? Sure, why not? Bottom line, she didn't care. Hopefully she finds the Inquisition life more interesting.

Erimond on the other hand seemed like a true believer. He actually tried. He was somewhat amusing in how he addressed the Wardens, and in how he napped back at Clarel. He was arrogant up to the point when you sentence him to tranquility. That's when he shows that he's a worm again, like he does when you counter his attempt to control the anchor, or when he gets beat down by Clarel.

Calpernia was more of an anti-hero, but I like her character just the same. She can be reasoned with, she has standards of conduct, and yet she's a super bad-ass pyro-bloodmage. She was never a blind follower. She had a mind of her own and she used it to suspect Corypheus. She has an interesting fascination with unique forms of magic, like with the memory crystal, or the runes to ward off demons.

I'd say the bad villains are those that just come off as pathetic. Like Denam, who thinks he's tough, but is really just a punk. He cries when he's found out, and blames other officers or claims he was just following orders. What a punk. Can't even man up and take responsibility for his villainy. Disappointing. You don't even feel sorry for him if he's turned into a behemoth.

Fiona is the same way. Stupid decision on top of stupid decision. She could have forsaken her pledge to Alexius, which wasn't even her right to do in the first place, and in the end she's just so pathetic that she doesn't even seem like a worthy opponent. I destroyed all the Venatori first and then had all four of my party members gang up on her, one of whom was Vivienne. But it didn't even feel satisfying to kill her. It just felt sad. What a lame villain, Fiona. The only winner from that one was Alistair.

[Shechinah]

I want to become a God, again isn't necessarily very nuanced either.
 
And I did Calpernia's quest. Just....again it was decent, but nothing noteworthy.

 
Corypheus' motivation to become a god stemmed from his crisis of faith from finding the seat of the Maker empty and coming to question the existence of the Old Gods especially Dumat whom he was the High Priest of during the time of old Tevinter. This only make sense given that the impact of belief in his life: he believed what he and the other magisters did were by the guidence of the Old Gods. Now he awakens in a time where everything is different including himself and he cannot even rely on the guiding whispers of the god he was led himself be guided by. His own uncertainty is further compounded by what he believes he saw in the fade: that the very thing that would cement the existence of gods was empty of proof.
 
He believes the existence of a divine being is necessary for the world to remain orderly: he genuinely believes what he is doing is for the benefit of other people and that becoming a god will allow him to undo what he sees in the world as decay.
 
Corypheus' Memories: "How does this age stand such desolation? They sing to a "Maker" who answers no prayers. Once I have ascended, I will be their answer. I will be their light."
 
Corypheus' Memories: "I recited the old verses. How easily they come. Even after so long a slumber. Yet still I do not feel the presence of Dumat - hear no whispers, no commands. Silence has fallen."
 
His motivation and experience fitted with the theme of faith and the exploration of how people handled it but in the case of Corypheus, it was poorly executed, in my opinion, which led to his motivation appearing to be the generic motivation of wanting to become a god for power and power alone.

[TheAtomicSurvivor]

 
 
His motivation and experience fitted with the theme of faith and the exploration of how people handled it but in the case of Corypheus, it was poorly executed, in my opinion, which led to his motivation appearing to be the generic motivation of wanting to become a god for power and power alone.

 

I argued.....at the end of my point I discount codexes because I am talking strictly in the visual portrayal.  Because it's something to be portrayed in the narrative. In the writing. In the acting. This is not a storybook, I read the codexes. But if someone didn't read the codexes, they come off shallow because of the way their dialogue was written. 

[Tidus]

Alexius was mentally unstable look what he did in "Dark Future" and even he was betrayed in the end by Corypheus for failing. So,he loses his head. I can't forgive his part in helping Corypheus destroy the world in the dark future and the fact he wanted me dead just to please Corypheus..

 

Nope..No bleeding heart here.

[fdrty]

I think the villains in Inquisition were very well done. There's a consistent theme amongst them, which fits Corypheus thematically.

 

That is, just as the Old Gods corrupted the Tevinter magisters, and blight corrupts living things, so does Corypheus corrupt otherwise good, or at least talented, people into his service.

 

Florianne, Clarel, Samson, Calpernia - what do they all have in common? They are all talented people who lack power due to the unique things that oppress them. Corypheus then offers them power, but at a steep cost.

 

Florianne is the Grand Duchess. But, in a civil war where her older brother and her Empress cousin are warring, she feels like an afterthought. Let's be honest: Orilais is about who plays the 'great game' the best. Clearly, Florianne is the best player. She steers the player to suspect Gaspard, manipulates Gaspard into striking against Celene, and manages to alienate Celene from Briala and the elves. Florianne, by the rules of the game, should be empress, but she has been neglected for so long: imagine how much it sucks to be overlooked because you were born second, when you are clearly the smarter and better choice to rule? Worse, she'd have succeeded if not for the Inquisitor. If you send her to a cloister she says that 'you may as well have killed her' - because it's an oppressive atmosphere that's the same as the gilded cage that she's had to live in her entire life. In that sense, she's like Cassandra if Cassandra never left home.

 

Clarel is faced with the horror of the calling striking the entirety of the wardens at once. Not only do the wardens face a monumental task which will take the lives of every member, but they have to face the fact that, even then they are unable to stop the devastation caused by the blight. The 5th blight was caught early, and it still caused a huge amount of damage. Look at other blights on the wiki to see how bad it can really get when blights last generations. Clarel's flaw was her stupidity in trusting Blood mages, but she wouldn't be the first warden to do so. Hell, I trusted Blood mages in Origins (Avernus, Jowan and Morrigan, among others).

 

Calpernia was a slave. She has seen the injustice of Tevinter first-hand. She wants to make it better, though, and, while to many of the Venatori 'A better Tevinter' means invading the south, to Calpernia it means ending the unjust and archaic structures within Tevnter that hold everyone back: chiefly, slavery. That was the promise Corypheus made: it is fitting that his plan for her reveals him to be a complete hypocrite; he plans to make her a slave again as the vessel of Mythal. That shows Corypheus' true nature: lie, corrupt good intentions, enslave.

 

Samson also had people who he genuinely cared for, and, though he was a criminal he tried to help those in need in DA2. He also cared for his tranquil friend. But, like all red templars, his addiction was used to control him, and his lust for power, after being powerless for so long, turned him into a monster.

 

In that view, Alexius is by far the worst of Corypheus' villains. Because, not only was he in a privileged position as a magister, but he was also an incredibly skilled mage who could have easily enacted real change by himself. He turned to Corypheus out of sheer lust for power for its own sake, not because he had a genuine desire to enact some sort of positive change in the world.

 

TLDR, I think the villains had a consistent theme behind them, many of them were humanised well and there was a lot of different motivations given for their actions

[KaiserShep]

If I went on a magical field trip and returned a hideous immortal magical monster, I'd go on a cackling evil quest for godhood too. Beats living with the other monsters in a cave. 

[Shechinah]

I argued.....at the end of my point I discount codexes because I am talking strictly in the visual portrayal.  Because it's something to be portrayed in the narrative. In the writing. In the acting. This is not a storybook, I read the codexes. But if someone didn't read the codexes, they come off shallow because of the way their dialogue was written. 

 

It's in his dialogue at Haven: I just did not feel like transcribing it so I used the other quotes intead.
 

[wicked cool]

I liked the villians in dai

Cory was my favorite part of da2 . Would have like to have seen more of him in dai. Would have liked to see him take over a bodyagain.

Loved the taunting of the abyss demon

[thats1evildude]

I want to become a God, again isn't necessarily very nuanced either.

I don't know what the hell you're complaining about. Omnipotence is a pretty worthwhile goal for a villain.

What does 'nuance' even mean in the context of a villain's motives? "I want to take over the world because my daddy beat me?"

https://m.youtube.co...h?v=G2y8Sx4B2Sk

[TheAtomicSurvivor]

I don't know what the hell you're complaining about. Omnipotence is a pretty worthwhile goal for a villain.

What does 'nuance' even mean in the context of a villain's motives? "I want to take over the world because my daddy beat me?"

https://m.youtube.co...h?v=G2y8Sx4B2Sk

 

No, but there needs to be a sense of "humanity" and humanity isn't described as sympathetic. 

 

It's being able to portray what you're suppose to portray. If Corypheus was confused and unsure of a world that had no God, there was no indication in that way. He sounded more like a baby.

 

At least Solas had some emotion that he conveyed. You could feel a "person" like being, who was thoroughly confused with the world he walked into. Where as Corypheus started tantrums most of the time and had no way of conveying his emotions.

 

Nuance is not "daddy beat me"

 

Nuance is in the way the character's dialogue is written and in the way they are delivered. If Corypheus was truly appalled by the fact there were no gods, there was no moment to feel for his plight.

 

I already said, it didn't have to be a sympathetic villain for me to like them. In general I like the villains, as long as they feel menacing. I still like the Horn King from the Black Cauldron no matter how cliche he is, dude is cool, just the way he looks and sounds and commands his presence. I still like Atlas from Bioshock. I like the Devil from Legend played by Tim Curry.

 

That's it next game Corypheus should be voiced acted by Tim Curry. <---that's a joke

[Squinterific]

In that view, Alexius is by far the worst of Corypheus' villains. Because, not only was he in a privileged position as a magister, but he was also an incredibly skilled mage who could have easily enacted real change by himself. He turned to Corypheus out of sheer lust for power for its own sake, not because he had a genuine desire to enact some sort of positive change in the world.

 

TLDR, I think the villains had a consistent theme behind them, many of them were humanised well and there was a lot of different motivations given for their actions

 

What?.... No, that's not his motivation at all. He never sought power for power's sake, he just wanted his son to live. What good was all his power and skill if it meant his son would die anyway? That's the thing, Alexius was powerless where it mattered most to him. Being a magister and a brilliant scholar meant diddly squat in the end.

His backstory suggests Felix was always vulnerable because he was a weak mage, and ever since he was a kid, Alexius and his wife fought to protect him because the Magisterium would have eaten him alive.  Alexius' father wanted to have Felix killed for weakening their bloodline, so Livia Arida (Alexius's wife) had magister grandpa Alexius killed instead to protect their son. Alexius just couldn't deal with this loss of Felix, not after everything they went through to ensure Felix makes it in that cut-throat world. It was a flaw and a weakness, sure, but it made Alexius more human. He couldn't let go.

 

In a way, Alexius fell prey to what is both a saving grace and a fatal flaw of Tevinters. Like Dorian said - they are a passionate people who feel and care deeply, without reservations. Sometimes perhaps too much.

[Donquijote and 59 others]

Corypheus actually DOESN'T want to destroy the world. He thinks that Thedas needs a god, and that becoming one will be to everyone's benefit.

 

Corypheus is a lunatic these were his thoughts even in ancient Tevinter and see were it brought him....he didn't learned

[Qis]

The Archdemon in DA:O is a very good villain for me

 

i. he's mysterious

ii. he don't talk

iii. he appear in your dream

iv. he's leading an army of darkness and brooding

v. he's cunning and intelligent

vi. he's a silent predator

vii. he's not human, look like a mystical animal, but not an animal either

ix. you only hear about him from third, fourth, fifth parties

x. you see his exploit everywhere even realized it or not

 

In DA2 sadly i don't know who is the villain..Merdith? Orsino? Arishok? Blood Mages? Templars? There's no one i can consider villains actually

 

In DA:I, i laughed seeing Corypheus....

[Squinterific]

The Archdemon in DA:O is a very good villain for me

 

i. he's mysterious

ii. he don't talk

iii. he appear in your dream

iv. he's leading an army of darkness and brooding

v. he's cunning and intelligent

vi. he's a silent predator

vii. he's not human, look like a mystical animal, but not an animal either

ix. you only hear about him from third, fourth, fifth parties

x. you see his exploit everywhere even realized it or not

 

In DA2 sadly i don't know who is the villain..Merdith? Orsino? Arishok? Blood Mages? Templars? There's no one i can consider villains actually

 

In DA:I, i laughed seeing Corypheus....

 Loghain was the best villain in DA:O to me. The archdemon is just a big dumb diseased dragon

[Heimdall]

Regarding Corypheus,

I've always felt that Samson and Calpernia represented two facets of his character. Like Samson, Corypheus is a jilted believer with a nihilistic edge, not afraid to abuse his followers' trust to achieve his goals because nothing is sacred. Like Calpernia, he's a nationalist that genuinely wants to transform his homeland and make a better world (or what he thinks is better) rather than personal power.

I say all this fully understanding that Corypheus' character doesn't come through well in the writing of the game.

[vbibbi]

Regarding Corypheus,

I've always felt that Samson and Calpernia represented two facets of his character. Like Samson, Corypheus is a jilted believer with a nihilistic edge, not afraid to abuse his followers' trust to achieve his goals because nothing is sacred. Like Calpernia, he's a nationalist that genuinely wants to transform his homeland and make a better world (or what he thinks is better) rather than personal power.

I say all this fully understanding that Corypheus' character doesn't come through well in the writing of the game.

 

Yeah, the depth of Corypheus' story is skimmed over, I think, which is a shame. He has some interesting concepts to him, but it's easy to skip that when his in game presentation is cackling darkspawn magister.

 

Calpernia worked better for me than Samson, as I'm still not on board with the Red Templar creed of "templars are slaves to the Chantry anyway so might as well turn them into actual monsters." That's why I still can't appreciate Samson or Denam or Lucius: they might think they're making sacrifices for the Greater Good of the world, but where is any evidence that if Corypheus succeeds in his plan, anything will improve?

 

All of the Venatori and other followers of Cory are putting a lot of faith into his plan to reenter the Black City and become a god. But if their reasoning is "things can't get any worse for me, might as well gamble on this guy," it's a very flimsy argument. There is actually every chance that things could get worse, and given the events throughout DAI, it's more likely that things would get worse than better if Cory actually got to the Fade.

 

The logic of Cory's plan is nonsensical. He entered the Fade the first time and brought the Blight to Thedas and became one of the first darkspawn. We haven't heard of any reason why he thinks the second time around will be more successful. Instead, all of the rifts are pouring out demons and harming Thedas. There's also no explanation of what would actually happen if Cory manages to get into the Black City. He indicates that he doesn't remember most of what happened when he entered the first time, only that it was empty, so he doesn't actually have any further knowledge of how to be granted godlike powers if he returns.

 

I think if the game had actually shown any logic in his plan and explained why so many people believed in him, his role as villain would have been improved. Say what you will about Solas and his plan, at least I have the sense that he knows mechanically what he is doing, even if the end results bite him in the behind. Cory has the logic model of the underwear gnomes. Enter the Black City...something something...godhood and paradise on Thedas!

[TheAtomicSurvivor]

 

 

I think if the game had actually shown any logic in his plan and explained why so many people believed in him, his role as villain would have been improved. Say what you will about Solas and his plan, at least I have the sense that he knows mechanically what he is doing, even if the end results bite him in the behind. Cory has the logic model of the underwear gnomes. Enter the Black City...something something...godhood and paradise on Thedas!

 

Pretty much this

[vbibbi]

Pretty much this

 

IMO the "Cory is a one dimensional villain, he wants to become a god" is the low hanging fruit argument. The much larger issue is that his plan is never actually explained, and I would bet if we asked a Bio writer what the plan was, they wouldn't have actually written out a reasonable plan.

 

In that sense, he is a cliche villain because while his motivations might lie in human reasoning, his execution of those motivations are Saturday morning cartoon logic.

 

I wrote before that it could have been an interesting twist if we had gone into the future in IHW and it hadn't been the apocalyptic landscape we see. If instead it was a type of dystopia for the Venatori who had enslaved everyone else. This could show that Cory actually had some idea of what he was doing when he went into the Black City, but that he still needed to be stopped because his version of the perfect world wouldn't be our version of the perfect world.

 

Show Venatori ruling over non-mages and non-Tevenes, maybe have them have leashed demons at their beck and call (who only rarely escape and cause mayhem). Have red lyrium growing everywhere and it's still kind of an issue but look over there everything's fine, by the glory of Corypheus.

 

I also think the fact that he's a giant friggin darkspawn is glossed over in the game. Really, all of his followers would be okay being ruled by a darkspawn god? No one saw the speech, drank the kool aid, but then said to the fellow standing next to them, "yeah I mean he brings up some good points but he is a ten foot tall ancient abomination."? Even Florianne was like, "lol I mean it sucks being the ignored noble in a position of pure luxury and having all of my wants taken care of. I bet if this ancient darkspawn magister comes into power I can be ruler over a blighted landscape. That sounds attractive."

[Al Foley]

I personally found Corypheus to be a very sympathetic character to a certain degree.  Granted he is not the best villain in the entire series, that has to go to the Arishock and Architect, but consider his motivations for wanting to become a God.  He just does not want to become a God he wants to become a God because he went to the Golden City on the command of what he believed was his god, and found it empty and corrupted beyond belief.  And then he resolved to go about and do something about it .  Very interesting motivations and very relevant for the times we live in, talking about real world stuff here. 

[Qis]

 Loghain was the best villain in DA:O to me. The archdemon is just a big dumb diseased dragon

 

Loghain is not a villain in DA:O, The Archdemon is. Loghain is a character that depends on your view about him, he could be a hero, he could kill The Archdemon and die a hero.

 

The true villain in DA:O is The Archdemon, a mysterious, mystical, intelligent, fearsome immortal being. The world will be in ruin should he's not defeated and killed.

 

Bioware should just expand about The Archdemon in DA2 and DA:I, but they don't, and that's their greatest mistake.

 

DA:O should be the intro to the main villain of the whole series, we should learn more about "The Archdemons", there are few more isn't it? That's the recipe of a succesful story...look at Harry Potter, Lord of the Ring, Star Wars and many more...

[Al Foley]

Loghain is not a villain in DA:O, The Archdemon is. Loghain is a character that depends on your view about him, he could be a hero, he could kill The Archdemon and die a hero.

 

The true villain in DA:O is The Archdemon, a mysterious, mystical, intelligent, fearsome immortal being. The world will be in ruin should he's not defeated and killed.

 

Bioware should just expand about The Archdemon in DA2 and DA:I, but they don't, and that's their greatest mistake.

 

DA:O should be the intro to the main villain of the whole series, we should learn more about "The Archdemons", there are few more isn't it? That's the recipe of a succesful story...look at Harry Potter, Lord of the Ring, Star Wars and many more...

Comparing Lord of the Rings, Harry Potter, and Star Wars...all direct sequel series...to Dragon Age...which is an anthology is a bit silly.  There is no continuation in main characters so necessarily having the same villain carry on from installment to installment would not make a lot of sense.  They are already risking a lot by probably having Fen'harel as the big bad of the next game.  

[TheAtomicSurvivor]

I personally found Corypheus to be a very sympathetic character to a certain degree.  Granted he is not the best villain in the entire series, that has to go to the Arishock and Architect, but consider his motivations for wanting to become a God.  He just does not want to become a God he wants to become a God because he went to the Golden City on the command of what he believed was his god, and found it empty and corrupted beyond belief.  And then he resolved to go about and do something about it .  Very interesting motivations and very relevant for the times we live in, talking about real world stuff here. 

 

Again though, to portray a "sympathetic" villain one most portray the character through movements and through voice acting. It's like everyone keeps forgetting this aspect. Dragon Age, for what its worth, is still a video game, and a visual medium. And I like the Architect the most of the two choices. But that's because the Architect had emotions. You could see it on his face. You could hear the sympathy and the fact that he's trying to explain his circumstance:

 

 

Versus Corypheus. Who only displays rage and anger, for the whole game. Which sounds like a child's argument

 

-You stole Corypheus' Anchor, tantrum, attacks Haven

-You defeat him in the Arbor Wilds, tantrum, tries to attack you while at the Well

 

Never once did Corypheus:

 

-Go to Haven

-Say, what happened to the Conclave was a mistake

-Say, the anchor was a spell wrong, and even if the choice is arbituary ask the Inquisitor for the anchor himself

 

Imagine, if we had an exchange with Corypheus the way Solas had an exchange with us in the Trespasser DLC. Where Solas explains he was too weak, you can see in his facial expressions the pain. And you can empathize with him, even if Solas is completely bonkers. We never got that chance with Corypheus.

 

He sounds angry when he talks about the seat of the Gods. Instead of a dialogue that is similar in an essence

 

"I opened my eyes, to a world, and visited a throne of Gods and it was empty. I try to understand this world, and all I see are people running around confused. And I decided that this world needs a God, needs someone to allow them to have meaning to their life" 

 

We never have this grounded. Human moments with Corypheus. Its just blind, childish rage.