In general, I have to say that I usually play a heroic character in most video games. I know that this is kind of lame for most people; but I have to admit that for some reason I hate doing bad things to people in video games. Perhaps its the concept itself or perhaps it just seems more difficult to be evil in most cases. Because even in open world video games where you can do virtually anything in any order; it seems like the designers of the game really meant you to play their game as a good guy. There is nothing wrong with being good and heroic. Certainly there have been a terribly large number of movies based on the idea of the one really good guy saving the world. I usually like playing a female as most movies and games seem to have problem having a female protagonist and hey I love female models more than male ones. Usually because many of the male skins seem to be absolutely terrible. But currently being so far into Dragon Age Origins that I'm starting to think about it at work and dream about it; something has been nagging me. Long ago there was something called, Advanced Dungeons and Dragons. Perhaps you've heard of the current 4th edition that came out last year to not much fanfare. But something that is a staple of this role playing pen and paper game is the alignment system. What is alignment? Well, it's basically shows how good or evil you are. Which has, as mentioned above become a staple of some recent western RPGs including the aforementioned Dragon Age Origins. So here is how the alignments worked out in AD&D:
"In the current 4th edition of the game, the alignment system[4] has been simplified.
* Lawful Good: Civilization and order.
* Good: Freedom and kindness.
* Unaligned: Having no alignment; not taking a stand.
* Evil: Tyranny and hatred.
* Chaotic Evil: Entropy and destruction." Courtesy of Wikipedia...
So what does this have to do with anything? Well, this kind of nuance here is quite deep and completely unlike any video game. Even in most Bioware games which are very story based and usually have quite a deep set of options; seem to be lacking when it comes to simple alignment. Seems like most games where there is a choice between good and evil that's all there is. Either you are good or you are evil. There was an instance in Knights of the Old Republic 2 that allowed you to be neutral but I think that was as far as it's ever gone. At least in the non-Dungeons and Dragons franchise games.
The problem with this is that often the problems presented in these games are not exactly black and white. Or at least that's how they appear. But in Mass Effect and Dragon Age Origins there definitely seem to be good and evil choices. Also Fable and Fable 2 were incredibly guilty of this. Fable 2 actually had you helping slavers if you were evil. Certainly there would be evil people unwilling to do this. What I thought was even funnier was that you couldn't just kill all the slavers and save all the slaves and remain evil.
I think the very fact that some of the characters in Dragon Age Origins that have questionable mortality are completely fine with you helping evil people but are less than thrilled when you make, "the ends justify the means decisions," which is really odd considering that even in the fiction for Dragon Age Origins this is usually the reason the "evil" characters give for their actions.
So why the sliding alignment scale? Well, to label some one anything other than good or evil gets a little complicated. Especially when you have NPCs reacting to you. The problem with this is, however, is that you have to be so vilely evil to be evil that it often seems not only inappropriate but it is normally ANYTHING but the easy way out. Most of the time evil is labeled as the easy way out or the cowards way out. The problem is that in most video games it is actually incredibly difficult to actually be reading the story and understanding your role in the story and still be evil. There are definitely people out there who do this. But I don't really think that this is the idea the developers are going for.
There are responses in many parts of Fable, Fable 2, Dragon Age Origins, Star Wars Knights of the Old Republic, Star Wars Knights of the Old Republic 2, Jade Empire, and Elder Scrolls IV: Oblivion that really make no sane sense in the context that they are in. Most people who are 'evil" and aren't psychotic or completely insane are generally normal acting people who occasionally or regularly do evil things. They don't talk to people like they are spoiled 1st graders and they rarely out right mock authority. If you are evil and are presented to the President of the United States its unlikely that you will spit in his face. You might write nasty things about him on your blog but you certainly won't do anything that would make you look bad in front of everyone. But then this gets into why people are evil and I REALLY don't think that most writers and designers of video games think about this too thoroughly.
After all, in Dragon Age Origins it would be pretty easy to see why some of the characters' origin stories would generate evil people. But what they don't generate are broken crazy people. At least these folks wouldn't make it into the Gray Wardens. If your outward attitude was unbalanced it's doubtful that old seasoned Duncan would select you as his candidate for the Gray Wardens. Also in Mass Effect being chosen as an Elite agent, a Spectre. You would hardly be chosen for such a thing if you were psychotic. Even Saren isn't THAT evil. He would be considered Lawful Evil by the Advanced Dungeons and Dragons folks.
So even though Dragon Age Origins is the BEST story driven RPG of all time. I think the folks doing the dialogue choices should bulk up on their old school pen and paper RPGs and stop giving us such crazy choices. Because when you have 5 dialogue choices and only 3 of them make any sense. You really only have 3 choices. This goes beyond my personal choices and more goes into creating a consistent understandable story that doesn't have characters doing insane things and the other party members not just killing their crazy leader. There are certainly some points in Bioware games and Lionhead games that do these very things but they are MUCH too far and few between.
So yes Zartan, you can kill all the villagers and save the world but it will probably be hard considering one of the villagers probably has some special weapon secreted away in their cupboard that would have helped you save it. So when you do reach the final battle you will probably die a few times and have to restart. Is that any way to be a hero or a good villain for that matter.
No comments:
Post a Comment