Creston wrote on Feb 11, 2014, 22:24:

Quinn wrote on Feb 11, 2014, 17:14:
My favourite anti-hero is actually Loghain, from Dragon Age 1. You know, the guy that decided a tactical retreat was in order, which ended in the death of King Cailen and gray warden Duncan. Phenomenal anti-hero in the prequel book to Origins.

As for Garrett? He's been showing constant signs of being "not evil". In D&D terms he'd be somewhere between Neutral and Chaotic Good, I think.

Sadly that's not all Loghain did. He then pretended the entire thing was the Grey Wardens' fault, declared them outlaws, sent assassins after them, and really really REALLY tried his very best to kill the few people left alive that could actually stop the Archdemon. He also assassinated a few of the nobles who wouldn't fall in line, had one's son tortured in his dungeons to persuade the father to join up, and finally he threatened civil war against disobedient nobles, all while the fucking Blight was at his doorstep.

There wasn't much 'hero' about him. He was just an asshole out for power.

Haha, yup that sums the ingame Loghain up, I must admit. Although Jerykk's reply should be taken into account. The Loghain of the book was different. He'd go through fire for the then-king, Maric. Without Loghain Maric (and thus Cailen) wouldn't have lived long and those Orlais enemies would've claimed Ferelden. The Loghain in the book is a perfect example of a great anti-hero.

This comment was edited on Feb 12, 2014, 05:54.

Task wrote on Feb 11, 2014, 13:20:
So I was playing Thief 1 Gold during the past weekend, beat the first mission on Expert. Felt good man, felt good. I only had to reload once during the sneaking since I jumped over some carpet but landed on hard marble making a super loud noise, alerting the guard in the next room. I stood still for several seconds, cringing, then I heard the guard yelling... "Oh sh--" moment. Snuck into a mansion and stole a sceptor like a boss. I'm Garret and I take gold for myself, hells yeah.

I guess you run the TFix?

Flatline wrote on Feb 11, 2014, 18:20:

Beamer wrote on Feb 11, 2014, 15:15:

banksie wrote on Feb 11, 2014, 15:10:

Beamer wrote on Feb 11, 2014, 13:20:
When your main character is a thief, you often have to go above and beyond to make it clear he's not the bad guy and not just some dick taking shit from other people.

No, Garret in the first three games always was a dick out taking shit. In fact it was his decided self interest and lack of wanting to force his ideology on others that was key - his talent and lack of interest made him the fulcrum for change and maintaining the balance. (Thief 1, stop the Pagans. Thief 2, stop the Hammerites. Thief 3, stop the Keepers.)

That was part of the fun of the first two games especially - he wasn't a conventional hero or anti-hero. Garret was the unwilling participant who always generally just wanted to be left alone so he could steal stuff.

I didn't say you need to be strongly motivated, or be the good guy, I said you need a bigger bad guy so that you seem less of the bad guy, relatively.

I think The Trickster fit that, no?

That's fine, but at the end of the day you can still have a big bad evil guy. The corrupt official meant to do good but really secretly lining his own pocket is *so* cliche that it probably owes royalties to someone.

I'd like to see *an* antagonist that isn't a villain.

If by "villain," you mean someone whose only concern is wealth and power, there are some antagonists that don't fit that mold. Loghain from DAO, The Master from Fallout, Comstock from BI, Andrew Ryan from Bioshock... basically any character who was driven by ideals more than greed or power.

Creston wrote on Feb 11, 2014, 22:24:

Quinn wrote on Feb 11, 2014, 17:14:
My favourite anti-hero is actually Loghain, from Dragon Age 1. You know, the guy that decided a tactical retreat was in order, which ended in the death of King Cailen and gray warden Duncan. Phenomenal anti-hero in the prequel book to Origins.

As for Garrett? He's been showing constant signs of being "not evil". In D&D terms he'd be somewhere between Neutral and Chaotic Good, I think.

Sadly that's not all Loghain did. He then pretended the entire thing was the Grey Wardens' fault, declared them outlaws, sent assassins after them, and really really REALLY tried his very best to kill the few people left alive that could actually stop the Archdemon. He also assassinated a few of the nobles who wouldn't fall in line, had one's son tortured in his dungeons to persuade the father to join up, and finally he threatened civil war against disobedient nobles, all while the fucking Blight was at his doorstep.

There wasn't much 'hero' about him. He was just an asshole out for power.

I don't think he was that two-dimensional. I think he did the things he did because he didn't trust Orlais or the Wardens with the future of Ferelden. He was essentially a paranoid xenophobe after the war with Orlais and wanted Ferelden to remain free from foreign involvement of any kind. This was the reason why he let Cailan die. He didn't feel that he could be trusted to maintain Ferelden's independence.

Quinn wrote on Feb 11, 2014, 17:14:
My favourite anti-hero is actually Loghain, from Dragon Age 1. You know, the guy that decided a tactical retreat was in order, which ended in the death of King Cailen and gray warden Duncan. Phenomenal anti-hero in the prequel book to Origins.

As for Garrett? He's been showing constant signs of being "not evil". In D&D terms he'd be somewhere between Neutral and Chaotic Good, I think.

Sadly that's not all Loghain did. He then pretended the entire thing was the Grey Wardens' fault, declared them outlaws, sent assassins after them, and really really REALLY tried his very best to kill the few people left alive that could actually stop the Archdemon. He also assassinated a few of the nobles who wouldn't fall in line, had one's son tortured in his dungeons to persuade the father to join up, and finally he threatened civil war against disobedient nobles, all while the fucking Blight was at his doorstep.

There wasn't much 'hero' about him. He was just an asshole out for power.

Clint Eastwood owned the anti-hero role.

This new Thief looks like shit, though. It looks like they hired the writers from Scooby Doo.

Flatline wrote on Feb 11, 2014, 13:12:
Yawn. Another super corrupt snidely whiplash evil bad guy.

Why not break the trend and make him a genuinely good person trying to do a needed job in a city overrun with crime? Don't team up with Garrett, don't have a sudden twist, but have the balls to introduce a guy who is clearly an antagonist but is not a villain.

$20 today's kids don't know who Sindely Whiplash it anyway. :p Which is why they can get away with it.

But see that would make sense, then again it would probably fly over the heads of the "core demographic" who've never read anything more difficult than green eggs and ham.

Quinn wrote on Feb 11, 2014, 17:14:
My favourite anti-hero is actually Loghain, from Dragon Age 1. You know, the guy that decided a tactical retreat was in order, which ended in the death of King Cailen and gray warden Duncan. Phenomenal anti-hero in the prequel book to Origins.

As for Garrett? He's been showing constant signs of being "not evil". In D&D terms he'd be somewhere between Neutral and Chaotic Good, I think.

According to DnD alignment lore, hurting innocents (And this does not just entail violence) by any action is evil, breaking the laws set by the socially established power class is chaotic (betrayal is VERY chaotic). This means stealing something valuable and potentially very important for someone from some random person is actually chaotic +5 evil +5 per act.

But I think what this really shows is how inane the DND alignments really are. I don't think they represent morality very well at all. And to me Garret would just be "chaotic with questionable morals" unless he lived in a world where everyone thought stealing was super awesome and a hero's duty. (hehe)

And yeah, Riddick ... chaotic evil ;p

I know it's probably silly, but to me Loghain was not a good anti-hero, because his actions (post retreat) made no sense. He seemed to only have the goal to destabilize the nation. Riddick on the other hand, was truly evil until he started to realize that it was a evil thing to do, and then he slowly started changing. Imo what makes a good anti hero is that if given the choice, you would seriously contemplate working with him to achieve some "higher" goal. In Witcher 2 I think was the only time I ever faced such a dilemma.

This comment was edited on Feb 11, 2014, 19:56.

They are intentionally not showing gameplay videos, since everyone complains about them.

The background on this trailer is pretty crappy. If some guard killed at the magnitude where 100s of bodies pile up every week, there would be no one left alive to work jobs, keeping the city running.

runnerct32 wrote on Feb 11, 2014, 16:28:
I thought this was the 4th thief game? Why do they say it's the 3rd?

They're not. It's just the third trailer/clip they've released for T4.

@Task - Thanks for the links. Very helpful.

Beamer wrote on Feb 11, 2014, 15:15:

banksie wrote on Feb 11, 2014, 15:10:

Beamer wrote on Feb 11, 2014, 13:20:
When your main character is a thief, you often have to go above and beyond to make it clear he's not the bad guy and not just some dick taking shit from other people.

No, Garret in the first three games always was a dick out taking shit. In fact it was his decided self interest and lack of wanting to force his ideology on others that was key - his talent and lack of interest made him the fulcrum for change and maintaining the balance. (Thief 1, stop the Pagans. Thief 2, stop the Hammerites. Thief 3, stop the Keepers.)

That was part of the fun of the first two games especially - he wasn't a conventional hero or anti-hero. Garret was the unwilling participant who always generally just wanted to be left alone so he could steal stuff.

I didn't say you need to be strongly motivated, or be the good guy, I said you need a bigger bad guy so that you seem less of the bad guy, relatively.

I think The Trickster fit that, no?

That's fine, but at the end of the day you can still have a big bad evil guy. The corrupt official meant to do good but really secretly lining his own pocket is *so* cliche that it probably owes royalties to someone.

I'd like to see *an* antagonist that isn't a villain.

My favorite anti-hero has been Riddick since "Pitch Black". Love that movie.

Why would they make him a "good thief"? For the same reason Dungeons and Dragons renamed the Thief class the Rogue class -- to avoid accusations they're teaching your kids to be thieves (or, Heaven forbid, an assassin.)

My favourite anti-hero is actually Loghain, from Dragon Age 1. You know, the guy that decided a tactical retreat was in order, which ended in the death of King Cailen and gray warden Duncan. Phenomenal anti-hero in the prequel book to Origins.

As for Garrett? He's been showing constant signs of being "not evil". In D&D terms he'd be somewhere between Neutral and Chaotic Good, I think.

runnerct32 wrote on Feb 11, 2014, 16:28:
I thought this was the 4th thief game? Why do they say it's the 3rd?

Because 'Thief: Deadly Shadows' didn't stay true to the series, so it doesn't count. Some people liked DS, most didn't. Depending how this new Thief pans out, it may end up not counting as 3rd or 4th installment.

Beamer wrote on Feb 11, 2014, 15:44:
Well, being a thief makes you a defacto bad guy. I'm not a very large fan of the super wealthy in contrast with the super poor, but going and stealing from people whose only crimes are being wealthy makes you a jerk.

Given that the super wealthy often get to be so because they engage in a different form of larceny means that thieves often are respected through history as being good guys. Robin Hood and the popularist version of his tales would be a good example of a thief that is not regarded as a jerk.

But you missed my point - in order to nip any morality questions in the bud, a game like this needs a large, over the top, clearly evil person. Having Garrett go up against a guy that was trying to do good would make Garrett look like a bad person. Having him go up against someone incredibly over the top evil makes Garrett's crimes look fine in comparison.

But Garret was going up against people/entities who thought they were doing good. The Trickster is reviling against the active abuse of nature and wants to return the city back to a more forested realm. Karras is striving to achieve a more orderly existence for the city. The Keepers were trying to keep the balance and in turn were desperately clinging to the status quo. Part of the cleverness is that the 'villans' of the piece aren't bad per se - their intentions are noble but their extremism leads them to do horrific things.

That and Garret is never redeemed from being a selfish, amoral jerk. He never is made to look good, he never saves the world purely to save the world - his motives are usually much more personal. He gets attacked by the Trickster and is largely out for revenge over losing an eye. Karras he is guilt tripped into dealing with because of Victoria's sacrifice. The Keepers he is just sick of being the object of their prophecies. This is the charm of Garret - he is doing things always for his own reasons and it is why the Thief series story is highly regarded. It is a more nuanced and subtle take.

I think this is what is a little concerning with the new game - the trailers so far show little nuance and seem to be more targeting the game as an action one with a very trite story.

jacobvandy wrote on Feb 11, 2014, 14:31:

Beamer wrote on Feb 11, 2014, 13:20:

Flatline wrote on Feb 11, 2014, 13:12:
Yawn. Another super corrupt snidely whiplash evil bad guy.

Why not break the trend and make him a genuinely good person trying to do a needed job in a city overrun with crime? Don't team up with Garrett, don't have a sudden twist, but have the balls to introduce a guy who is clearly an antagonist but is not a villain.

When your main character is a thief, you often have to go above and beyond to make it clear he's not the bad guy and not just some dick taking shit from other people.

What's wrong with playing a bad guy, though? I don't get why fluffy mainstream game writers are still staying away from anti-heroes, despite the insane popularity of shows like Breaking Bad.

You are talking about Square Enix..... innovative writing is not something you will EVER see from them. But... garret was never the good guy in any Thief game. Only at the end of Thief 3 was there some character development towards "not evil"....

Beamer wrote on Feb 11, 2014, 13:20:
When your main character is a thief, you often have to go above and beyond to make it clear he's not the bad guy and not just some dick taking shit from other people.

Like the Ubisoft ip legal team?

I thought this was the 4th thief game? Why do they say it's the 3rd?

Cutter wrote on Feb 11, 2014, 15:53:
Your best example of the anti-hero in film today is Mel Gibson's character, Porter in Payback. Not a nice guy, pretty merciless, but not a complete dick either. However, it's already been established that Garrett is no anti-hero. He's a thief, plain and simple. He's just happened to have stumbled into a Scooby Doo and the Mystery Machine kind of mystery.

I'm enjoying the anti-heroes of True Detective because none of them are really cool. Interesting, but I don't think anyone is sitting around going "man, that guy is awesome, I wish I was like him!"