Infamous Quests
The Games => Quest for Infamy => Topic started by: Bad2DaBone on February 25, 2013, 08:12:55 PM
-
So is there anything that would be considered too evil to show or portray in a game like this? Should there be "no limit" to telling a dark story, or should there be some boundaries?
-
Again, this isn't a game about being "evil", so naturally there are a lot of things that wouldn't be really appropriate. The game is fun and lighthearted, and a little lacking in morals in places, but not evil.
The old adventure game "I have no mouth and I must scream" had a plot which was definitely about evil and did cover some very strong themes, but I think it got away with it because it was approached as social commentary.
-
Yeah, this game is not about being "evil". It's more about being a scoundrel. Big difference.
Bt
-
I wouldn't have pledged for QFI if Roehm was just an evil villain out to pillage the women and rape the land. I like the idea of playing a huge jackass who makes snarky and witty comments and does a bunch of "grey" things, though.
-
You'll love our next game starring Hugh Jass.
-
I wouldn't have pledged for QFI if Roehm was just an evil villain out to pillage the women and rape the land.
I would! ;D
-
I wouldn't have pledged for QFI if Roehm was just an evil villain out to pillage the women and rape the land.
I would! ;D
I think you're looking on the wrong forums for your kicks. qfi is a comedy nostalgia soaked adventure. you play a hardknock but far from evil.
-
There are certainly games about being evil - Crystal Shard's Quest for Yrolg comes to mind immediately, as do games like Dungeon Keeper where you play as a boss setting traps for heroes. The problem is that not many people would be motivated to play as an evil character, particularly if they're as evil as you seem to enjoy. I think the element of choice would be a critical factor - something like inFAMOUS, where you can choose to be good or evil, and either is a viable way to play the character. Being evil seems a bit more palatable when you're doing it because you want to, rather than because the game forces you to. I can't imagine why that is.
-
Lol, I'm not looking for a rape simulator but I'm just hoping Roehm's a really, really bad guy. My favorite stuff in QFG was always the thieving, but thieves would still spend 97% of their time being a goody-two-shoes.
It'll be nice to be doing some criminal stuff for a change and not just focusing on being a hero.
As for the option of being pure evil, the Fallout series is probably the best example.
-
You'll definitely get your chance to cause a little mayhem--certainly moreso than in Quest For Glory--it's just not the sole focus of the game. :)
-
Oh yeah, Malcolm's Revenge was a good game too!
The 3rd act of the game kinda sucked though, and at the end he's forced to be a hero. (even if he chooses to be a bastard still)
-
Lol, I'm not looking for a rape simulator but I'm just hoping Roehm's a really, really bad guy. My favorite stuff in QFG was always the thieving, but thieves would still spend 97% of their time being a goody-two-shoes.
It'll be nice to be doing some criminal stuff for a change and not just focusing on being a hero.
As for the option of being pure evil, the Fallout series is probably the best example.
To be fair, I can see your point in that it's no fun (for me at least) to play a goody-goody-all-the-time character in a game. Heck, I have to spend so much of "real" life being that way... ;) You know, when the concept of this game first came out, I want to say I remember that it did focus more on the "what if you COULD play the bad guy?" (if I remember correctly that is.) I was stoked at first...but you know they made an excellent point when they moved away from the "evil villain" main character. It might be fun to play at FIRST, but I bet it'd get old & pointless after a bit, kinda like playing Grand Theft Auto just to run over & beat up people for fun to take their money. And how would you even program a character who is (obviously) insane? You can't predict it because with a character like that, there is no rational thought processes.
...then again...it's midnight here & pretty sure I'm just rambling and need some sleep. :o
Oh but to what you said should be "off-limits" in a game like this? Hmm...no harming of children? I dunno really, but it takes a lot to shock me...
I liked Malcom's Revenge too. :P
-
Hmmm what's off limits? Well I would love to see an adventure game that didn't have any limits, besides the just outright insane.
It would quickly become a problem I think to leave everything open to the player. It has to be limited somehow for the sake of the story line in my opinion. Perhaps you could kill whoever you wanted but it would have to result in a death or a restore. Why? Because that character may have been important to the story to complete the game and by killing him or burning down his house you would have in fact made it impossible to finish the game. Not saying unimportant characters would qualify in that scenario.
Game's like Skyrim have to limit their open world, for example when your'e on a mission with an important character, that character is invincible throughout and won't die unless you do.
Besides the technical aspects for the story I think Mr. Roehm is more or less just a questionable guy. Yes you can get away with murder and do shady things, but there are several ways to reach your goal and I like that. Most of all a lot of the decisions for doing outright terrible things should result in a bit of humor. That's what I think will make QFI really follow through.
-
Jerm is right there, I don't think you can script a game that is "evil," as evil is by definition insanity and the insane person would just through an area and kill everyone because they felt like it. You can't tell a story like that. You really move into FPS games with the just kill everyone idea.
-
Yes - like I say, it's not about being evil, but more about being a scoundrel. Against the grain, against the law - against the "law" isn't always evil. Think of Han Solo in that respect. A smuggler, a knave... not an insane murderer.
Bt
-
Yes - like I say, it's not about being evil, but more about being a scoundrel. Against the grain, against the law - against the "law" isn't always evil. Think of Han Solo in that respect. A smuggler, a knave... not an insane murderer.
Bt
Arrggh! I was just going to say that -- Roehm is like Hans Solo, in that he's also a rakish scoundrel, a lovable rogue, a scruffy-looking nerf-herder, just looking out for his own best interests in this cold, harsh and lonely world... Trusting few, taking advantage of many...
Mind you, he's Han Solo from the original 1977 "It's-Greedo-or-me-so-I'll-shoot-first" movie, not the 1997 "Greedo-shoots-first-therefore-I-am-justified-by-defending-myself-(see-I'm-not-such-a-bad-guy-after-all---just-you-wait-and-see!)" Special Edition.
I know it's been discussed to death elsewhere (here I am bringing it up after almost 16 years(!)), but Han was an "unknown quantity" as far as his true motivations and loyalties throughout the 1977 movie -- that's what made him such an interesting character. For the 1997 Special Edition, his "innate goodness" was ret-conned in that one scene, telegraphing his "basic decency" a mile away for the rest of the movie.
It comes down to 1977's "choice" (Han actively chooses to fire first) versus 1997's "no choice" (Han reacts to defend himself). It did a disservice to his character arc just to make the scene more palatable for the the "kiddie" sensibilities...
-
Well, looking at the prequels...
But it'd be interesting to know how good is too good, too. I doubt Roehm is ever going to be a knight in shining armour, somehow, but if you wanted to, how "good" could you play him?
-
Heh - there's definite leeway to play him up and down a little. Some actions you choose may be more "infamous" than others. He's definitely not evil and in "The fru-its of the dev-il.... eeeeevil."
Bt
-
I think Cirque de Zale did it quite well, albeit a rather short game, where the character is not directly out to cause mischief but also has no desire to be a hero. He is quite reluctant to go off and do good for the people he meets, he's just out for himself and accidentally helps people anyway. Additionally in our game, what's in the character's best interests will probably involve intentionally helping some people since making allies is the best way to build yourself up to a strong position and gain power.
-
Ah, man! Cique de Zale! I LOVE that game!!!! Wow... can't believe that came out almost 10 years ago now...
Bt
-
Perhaps you could kill whoever you wanted but it would have to result in a death or a restore. Why? Because that character may have been important to the story to complete the game and by killing him or burning down his house you would have in fact made it impossible to finish the game.
Or perhaps a justifiable dead end. If a player is going to be childish enough to go around slaughtering everything that moves, let them move on to a brainless FPS or pay the consequences of an unwinnable game.
-
Yeah, which is why you can smash the door to Rayford's house, or kill the Blacksmith - but it ends the game!
Bt
-
Perhaps you could kill whoever you wanted but it would have to result in a death or a restore. Why? Because that character may have been important to the story to complete the game and by killing him or burning down his house you would have in fact made it impossible to finish the game.
Or perhaps a justifiable dead end. If a player is going to be childish enough to go around slaughtering everything that moves, let them move on to a brainless FPS or pay the consequences of an unwinnable game.
Or perhaps:
With this character's death, the thread of prophecy is severed. Restore a saved game to restore the weave of fate, or persist in the doomed world you have created.
-
Yeah, I was gonna mention Morrowind too, Stuart. I've accidentally killed loads of side quest dudes because my personality stat was so high by the end that no one ever attacked me. Couldn't tell who the baddies were coz I'd walk into a cave and all the bandits would like "HEY BRO!" so I just killed everyone.
-
Does he have to be evil. You could possibly play him as just some innocent guy merely trying to take over the world to make it a better place. Ok a better place for himself maybe but still a better place. Actually taking over the world sounds like too much work, maybe just the kingdom or the town.
-
Mr Roehm isn't evil, just out for himself. Evil would be boring to play. You'd kill everyone and there'd be nothing left to do!
-
doesn't good only win cause evil is lazy.
-
doesn't good only win cause evil is lazy.
...but evil will always triumph, because good is dumb.
-
(to the above)
Your profile pic.....
What's that bump in his rear? Did Roehm take a dump or something?
-
I think its his cape
-
Do you mean the foot?
-
Yep. That is his foot.
Bt
-
I can't help but think of this:
@1:30
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WGZ5v7cnyq0#ws (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WGZ5v7cnyq0#ws)
-
now I can't get the thought 'evil is clumsy' out of my head.
-
He Selfish rogue that does not make him evil. Hell characters in song ice and fire are great example of how ever one different shade grey, not absolute of anything, or typicality idea of villain or hero.
-
it helps that good and evil is relative to what you've been taught they are.
-
(to the above)
Your profile pic.....
What's that bump in his rear? Did Roehm take a dump or something?
As everyone else mentioned, it is indeed his foot (specifically his boot), kicked-up behind him...
(http://i1323.photobucket.com/albums/u592/Goatmeal/IntellivisionRunCycle_NightStalker_zpse02d6aa7.png)
-
those last two positions look painful
-
those last two positions look painful
;D
-
Well they do, I'm assuming walking irl isn't like that for most people :o
-
Well they do, I'm assuming walking irl isn't like that for most people :o
True enough, but it looks pretty good "in motion"...
(http://i1323.photobucket.com/albums/u592/Goatmeal/FS_Icon_RunningMan_04_10cs_zpsf5b1bf0c.gif)
-
thats not walking thats running ::)
watch out for that tree
-
thats not walking thats running ::)
Well, the first image Goatmeal posted says "Intellivision Run Cycle"
-
and stalking
-
and stalking
That's the name of the of the classic Intellivision game, "Night Stalker," from which this particular animation cycle was used (and recreated here). The character you play is being stalked by robots, so there's not a whole lot of walking around to avoid/destroy them -- you have to run! :D
I can slow down the animation cycle to more of a "walk" speed, if you'd like. ;)
-
But then he'd fall over, trying to walk with both his feet in the air at the same time :p
-
and anyway I've heard that running is when you've got both feet in the air, so slow or not it wouldn't be walking.
of course running for me used to be going at speed it was going to be difficult to stop without using a tree, or a nice soft person. never did get the hang of it.
-
heres a link to a video that discusses violence in games, as was mentioned earlier in this thread (which has moved on a bit, but this is relevant to earlier)
its on youtube with /watch?v=5ZM2jXyvGOc after it (couldn't link to it it wanted to drop the video in, didn't know if that were ok)