43 replies to this topic

[Feanor]

Some other interesting information : it seems that Bioware will make the villains more complex than the average. This was started in a topic at Bioware forums when someone was suggesting to have a villain who is not actually evil, but he believes he does it for the greater good.
To quote David Gaider again :

"But I digress. Personally what I'm most excited about with DA is approaching the tales with a bit more of an adult viewpoint... adult in terms of its moral complexity, which is what I think the original poster was hinting at here. I don't think you need to do it by having moral slave traders, though... I think the best way to go is to present the player with situations where right and wrong aren't identified so easily. The road to Hell, as they say, is paved with good intentions. The best villains, historically, are those who are utterly convinced that the path they take is righteous and necessary."

And I would say that, after all, the villain don't have to be portrayed always as greedy bastards who care only about themselves. A character can execute the prisoners without mercy, but at the same time he can also return himself into captivity because he does not conceive the idea of not keeping his word. A character who has no moral standards at all cannot inspire devotion into his followers.

[Archmage Silver]

Yet another feature that promises a lot... and perhaps they will add a chance to join the villain so evil characters won't be stuck to saving it all (NWN at that part was total crap pile).

[Tom]

Good villians can make or break a game, as it were. So better villians can only be a good thing, and that the choices a player makes in the game wont be simply "Give the dirty beggar all your money", "Ignore the dirty beggar" or "Slaughter the dirty beggar and everyone else in the area" sounds cool.

[igi]

You mean the bad guys won't wear black, have glowing red eyes, and murder children at the drop of a hat?
Hehe, will be nice to have situations where the player has to think about their actions/consequences.

[Tom]

I've never seen(and they've never shown) a bad guy murder children.

Havent seen Star Wars 3 yet? You should...

[Feanor]

I've never seen(and they've never shown) a bad guy murder children.

Havent seen Star Wars 3 yet? You should...

Star Wars 3 ???

BTW , there is Neb in BG1 and BG2.

[Tom]

    Star Wars 3 ??? 

    BTW , there is Neb in BG1 and BG2.

Star Wars III: Revenge of the Sith.
And yes, I had forgotten about Neb... nasty little man he is.

[Archmage Silver]

Although the drow are nastier, beholders, illithid... and the list goes on. Of course it's hard to find a human villain more vile a drow tho...

[Feanor]

I confess that I never understood why the main enemy has to be always a sadistic or nazie-style character or a crazy maniac obsessed with power, with no care for his followers.
After all, why the enemy of the main character must be depicted as the epithome of evil ? Regarding all the villains in the previous games - Sarevok, Irenicus, Amelyssan, Morag, Valsharess -, there is nothing which they won't do to win. They have only negative traits : they will resort to murder, torture, lies, treachery and they will kill their own mothers to gain more power. But why can't be one who still has some moral restraints ? Why can't be a villain cruel towards his foes, but honorable in his dealings and fair to his men ?
After all, the enemy does not always have to be like Hitler, sometimes could ressemble Caesar.
Maybe the producers don't want the player to feel compassion for their foes...

[SConrad]

Can we keep Star Wars spoilers off a topic discussing a game not very related to Episode III, please?

[Child]

Um...Nazie-fying villans? Surely Hitler saw what he was doing as righteous and justified? He wasn't evil for the sake of being evil. And neither were the German people.............

[Feanor]

Um...Nazie-fying villans? Surely Hitler saw what he was doing as righteous and justified? He wasn't evil for the sake of being evil. And neither were the German people.............

Well, I used the Hitler example as the ultimate type of villain. No matter how hard you try, you can't find anything good in him. Now that I explained why I mentioned him, this will be the last post concerning Hitler directly. Keep on-topic please.

Anyway, the Bioware team already said the story will be more ambiguous than usual, not like the Star Wars production with an obvious light versus dark struggle.

Edited by Feanor, 14 June 2005 - 06:03 AM.

[Child]

I'd like to debate the H man more, becoz i could at least find a bit of good in him, but anyway....


Right..back on topic..

So, when they say a not obvious light vs dark, what do u think they mean? Are they simply blurring the lines. BEcause you could make it civilisation vs barbarism, and that would still be opposites opposing.

Or, by ambiguous, do they actually mean that there will be sides, and extents. For example, could i subscribe to one point of view, become disillusioned, and subscribe to bits of the other, and then take the middle road? Presumably they are gonna bottle out and make two diametrically opposed sides, and just not align then to good or evil?

[Tom]

After all, why the enemy of the main character must be depicted as the epithome of evil ? Regarding all the villains in the previous games - Sarevok, Irenicus, Amelyssan, Morag, Valsharess

Ill give you Amelyssan and Irenicus (I cant comment on Morag and Valsharess, I never finished NwN, or wherever Valsharess came from) but Sarevok at least was fair to his own men, although rather abrupt. After all, he did have a number of friends...

[Celestine]

Sounds like Kreia of KOTOR II. Morag and Valsharess are both evil, power-hungry villians. As in KOTOR II, evil all started with good intentions and is a great paradox and to me, adds interest to the game. Maybe Aribeth makes a good villian, afterall, she was twisted within.

Irenicus seemed to be led astray by Bodhi. I'm not sure if he craved for power personally before his soul was messed up.

Edited by Celestine, 14 June 2005 - 04:23 PM.

[Archmage Silver]

Irenicus seemed to be led astray by Bodhi. I'm not sure if he craved for power personally before his soul was messed up.

Yes, I don't think that Joneleth wanted any more power than he had, but Bodhi wanted, envying Joneleth's place as Ellesime's lover and chosen of the Seldarine. So, Joneleth was too easy to lead and so he helped Bodhi in her attempt to steal the power of the tree of life. And so did he become Irenicus, I'm sure he cursed his weakness later, but there was no return.

[Feanor]

Well, Irenicus was an usual self-centered power-mad type of villain. He was punished justly for an act which could have destroyed a whole elven city and even more. His only motivations (his trait from the start or innoculated to him by his sister, does not matter) is a crazy lust for power and vengeance for totally selfish reasons. It became a little bit repetitive.
As well, the villain is evil to the core. None of them does not show any restraints. That became a stereotype too.

[Child]

Well, Irenicus was an usual self-centered power-mad type of villain. He was punished justly for an act which could have destroyed a whole elven city and even more. His only motivations (his trait from the start or innoculated to him by his sister, does not matter) is a crazy lust for power and vengeance for totally selfish reasons. It became a little bit repetitive.
  As well, the villain is evil to the core. None of them does not show any restraints. That became a stereotype too.

The problem with restraint is:

I've killed 30 people. I need to kill this one to. BUT IT'S GONE TOO FAR!!! I MUST STOP NOW. *gives self up*

Or, to put it another way, where is the fun in combating a villain who, when it comes to the crunch, decides against going through with his plan. Why would he show restraint on lesser issues, and then still go through with the big plan? It would be no fun zonking Irenicus if, at the Tree of Life, he suddenly decided he had gone too far and gave himself up.