Tyranny - Is being evil in RPGs fun?

HiddenX

The Elder Spy
Staff Member
Original Sin Donor
Original Sin 2 Donor
Joined
October 18, 2006
Messages
19,818
Location
Germany
Richard Cobbet asks the question "Is being evil in RPGs fun?" on Rock Paper Shotgun:

The RPG Scrollbars: The Fall Of Tyranny

Kickstarter’s been pretty good for RPGs. We may not have seen the next big leap yet – Divinity: Original Sin 2 is looking pretty damn special, mind – but it’s certainly breathed new life into the classics. Wasteland and Pillars of Eternity are both returning. Numenera went down well, despite a little over-promising. Divinity was superb.


Have I left anyone out? (Oh yeah, don’t forget Taz.)

Oh. Yes. Tyranny. If you thought that game kinda landed and faded quickly, you’re not alone. Despite being a very solid half of a game, even Obsidian/Paradox have admitted that when it came to it, “everyone was hoping that it would do better.” I think it deserved to. The thing is, I’m not sure this should have been a huge surprise.

[...]
More information.
 
Joined
Oct 18, 2006
Messages
19,818
Location
Germany
IMO RPGs should have plain evil path integrated. With choices/conseqences evolution in videogames where more and more RPGs are adding that aspect, the question should not be is being evil fun. The question should ask if modern RPGs need to take a step forward and allow us not to choose between good and lesser good only. We need the third, evil choice.

Example, sorry I'll take ME4. You catch a person that destroys electronics on the station, luckily no life was taken yet. Your option are sending the culprit to prison or exile. Where's an option to roleplay judge Dredd and put down that terrorist wannabe at the spot? An actual evil option that could also have it's major consequences (someone didn't die later, someone got angry at you, etc).

RPS concentrated on "is it fun" question. Dunno, I still haven't played Tyranny, so can't say. And won't be able to say based on just one "evil" RPG.
I know that I played the most overrated game GTA5 where I didn't care about killing people on street, in fact doing it felt fun as the game is such trash I couldn't care less about what am I actually doing in it as long as it's not plain boring driving.
 
Joined
Apr 12, 2009
Messages
23,459
I had a blast being evil in Tyranny, I loved the game. Please give me stories and stuff to do other than the standard "do-good/hero" options. Baldur's Gate 2 was a really fun example I think of allowing parties to choose a good or evil path with companions that really cared about your actions.

I still don't get why Tyranny didn't sell well. I thought it was a nice, tight little game that offered about 30 hours of good playtime.
 
Joined
Jun 5, 2015
Messages
508
Location
High, high up in the mountains of the southwestern
I would not call Tyranny exactly evil, more like depiction of ancient Roman empire with focus on more cruel aspects of law enforcement, that existed before humanism became a thing, and some WMDs slapped on top for more profound effect. Looking from modern moral high-ground on the past would allow us to paint any ancient civilization as unthinkably evil.
 
Joined
Aug 18, 2009
Messages
142
Location
Russia
I haven't played Tyranny, but it sounds like Age of Decadence. You basically have the choice of how to go about being a colossal dick to everyone, but not whether you're going to be a dick or not. It got tiring to me.

I find it fun to dabble and reload after choosing to do something horrible for giggles. But after completing KOTOR as evil as I could be and finding it less than satisfactory, I think I'm basically done with playing the villain.
 
Joined
Sep 14, 2012
Messages
127
I don't play evil characters but I would be up for games being in a more "grey" area where you could have your character be more out for himself or handle things in different ways while not being specifically evil.
 
Joined
Feb 24, 2010
Messages
875
I think whole "evil" concept if off the mark in the games, they try to make it seem like it is about being an obnoxious psychopath, but it is not. It is more about systematical disregard of other people plights and general well being, while focusing on personal gains and selfish benefits, or ruthlessly pursuing political and religious agendas justifying any inflicted suffering as mere means for achieving greater good.
 
Joined
Aug 18, 2009
Messages
142
Location
Russia
I've never played evil for as long as I've played games, afaik. So the only thing that ever interested me about Tyranny is if I could play without being evil. Apparently you can but I'm not sure any aspect of the game interest me really. Even now enjoying Expeditions Viking, I always decide on Trading with no kills.

I certainly don't have a problem with there being evil choices in games, as long as there's still at least neutral if not good choice as well. I completely disagree, Humanism is a 'thing' or some after thought of cruelty. It's utterly ridiculous, considering the only people who want war or cruelty, in real life are measurable psychotic psychopaths.
the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same way in any country. Hermann Goering

That's why I've never played more than the first Witcher. While I think CD Projekt are very talented; they constantly force to choose sides, with ridiculous choices. Abigail, Triss and Shani ring, the bank, the list of bullshit is nearly endless. There's never a neutral choice, hell much less ever offering obvious good choices.

I've always said from before the game was released, we should have been able to Character Create our own male or female Witcher. Of course att, the purest were so bent out of shape, there can't be any more Witchers, they can't have kids, they can only be males. Yet one of the main characters can apparently appear in anytime time, change reality and the purest have no issues with it.
 
Joined
Oct 18, 2006
Messages
2,772
Since real human beings aren't evil, I find most of these unnuanced takes on being "the bad guy" rather tedious and uninteresting. That said, I haven't played much of Tyranny so I can't comment on its quality in that way.
 
But after completing KOTOR as evil as I could be and finding it less than satisfactory, I think I'm basically done with playing the villain.

Well as far as I know no game has done it better than Kotor.

https://youtu.be/rDcN4adHcf0

Minute 9-10…heart wrenching.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Dec 20, 2010
Messages
3,216
Location
Sweden
War time is probably the right circumstance for an exploration of "evil". People can get away with atrocious acts during war that would have them locked up for life otherwise. If the game had sold itself as an exploration of dark times during military conquest rather than just participation in evil, it might have done a little better. At least make the sales message more nuanced.
 
Joined
Mar 22, 2012
Messages
5,521
Location
Seattle
Well as far as I know no game has done it better than Kotor.

https://youtu.be/rDcN4adHcf0

Minute 9-10…heart wrenching.

It was really well done. I just felt awful and empty doing all those horrible things and realized villain playthroughs really weren't for me. So I don't have much enthusiasm to try games like Tyranny.
 
Joined
Sep 14, 2012
Messages
127
It was really well done. I just felt awful and empty doing all those horrible things and realized villain playthroughs really weren't for me. So I don't have much enthusiasm to try games like Tyranny.

Oh, then I understand. I'm in agreement, my conscience just can't take doing evil stuff, it just makes me feel bad.
Chaotic good FTW...
 
Joined
Dec 20, 2010
Messages
3,216
Location
Sweden
Witcher series ( though it rarely leaves it as plain "evil" options) and few other games ( MotB in particular) handled this best.. most cases, Evil is pointless destructive behavior hamfisted into narrative "roleplaying" and without logical context. ( Kotor especially)
What was silly is portrayal of factions here, acting more as bickering children you need to appease, instead of armies under command of almighty tyrant.
 
Joined
Jun 5, 2015
Messages
3,898
Location
Croatia
Regarding playing evil in games, I think the relatively recent game "Hatred" was probably the most glaring example of this, because of how much controversy it generated. It even got slapped with an AO rating, which basically greatly reduces possible sales.

You play as a no-conscience, unrepentant mass murderer in the game, who goes to public locations and starts killing people. It's not a game I would ever buy or play myself, but it did OK, sales wise. Checking the steam sales, it is owned by over 100,000 people, which is not a huge success by any means, but not a massive failure either. For example, it has more owners than Torment: Tides of Numenera. Whether that means Torment was a really bad seller, or Hatred did better than expected, I guess is open to interpretation.

On the topic, I can see playing an antihero to be appealing, and that could have a very interesting story line and possibilities. If you ever read the Malus Darkblade books, I think he would be a fascinating character to play and make for a great rpg. He was evil, but in a way that basically fit into his culture and the societal norms in his world. In other words, it was not a repulsive type of mindless evil, but one that you could understand why he was doing it.
 
Joined
Oct 2, 2009
Messages
2,244
Location
Pacific NorthWest, USA!
Witcher series ( though it rarely leaves it as plain "evil" options) and few other games ( MotB in particular) handled this best.. most cases, Evil is pointless destructive behavior hamfisted into narrative "roleplaying" and without logical context. ( Kotor especially)
What was silly is portrayal of factions here, acting more as bickering children you need to appease, instead of armies under command of almighty tyrant.

True, Motb handled it really interestingly. I don't think Kotor did it poorly though, quite the opposite, although if we're talking grey Kotor 2 handled that part better.
 
Joined
Dec 20, 2010
Messages
3,216
Location
Sweden
True, Motb handled it really interestingly. I don't think Kotor did it poorly though, quite the opposite, although if we're talking grey Kotor 2 handled that part better.

I thought it was more comical at times, ranging from don Quixote type of do good-er, to someone who wants to kill everything for no reason ( this is also often the case with Fallout(s).)
You have to provide a solid psychological foundation for it, design narrative so that player's character evolves through it, instead of treat it as separate a,b,c dialogue options.
Mask of the Betrayer at least had an incentive for it, everyone' scorn for protagonist's "condition" and player could at least build believable context for his "transformation".
 
Joined
Jun 5, 2015
Messages
3,898
Location
Croatia
I thought it was more comical at times, ranging from don Quixote type of do good-er, to someone who wants to kill everything for no reason ( this is also often the case with Fallout(s).)
You have to provide a solid psychological foundation for it, design narrative so that player's character evolves through it, instead of treat it as separate a,b,c dialogue options.
Mask of the Betrayer at least had an incentive for it, everyone' scorn for protagonist's "condition" and player could at least build believable context for his "transformation".

Alright, I can agree to that. Still, I don't think I could stomach playing evil even if there were justifications, or rather, if the justifications are strong enough I probably wouldn't consider what I was doing as evil at all. Which perhaps would be the point? I'm pretty sure there are very few people in the world who consider themselves Evil, it's all about context, background and beliefs. But in my view of the world, if you hurt someone who can't defend themselves, like a child for example, you are evil.

There's of course some pretty damn obvious double standards at play here, since I eat meat. And with my own definition that should probably be evil too…
 
Joined
Dec 20, 2010
Messages
3,216
Location
Sweden
There's of course some pretty damn obvious double standards at play here, since I eat meat. And with my own definition that should probably be evil too…

Well, yeah, it's taking advantage of innocent creatures for pleasure rather than necessity. Mark my words, people in the future looking back at our games are going to be disturbed by the casual way the heroes go on "kill 15 boars and strip their hides" quests much like we would be perturbed by games that would have casual assumptions of racism and slavery.

Imagine technology outpaced social mores and we had retro games from the 1700s with quest givers going, "Excuse me kind sir, I know you are on a quest to save us from the evil king, but if you could help me round up my escaped slaves, I'd be much obliged. You may of course have your way with any that take your fancy as reward." It would be pretty weird and offputting if that kind of thing were just taken in stride in games where you were supposed to be the good guy, even though things like that may have reflected society at the time.
 
Joined
Sep 14, 2012
Messages
127
I haven't played Tyranny, but it sounds like Age of Decadence. You basically have the choice of how to go about being a colossal dick to everyone, but not whether you're going to be a dick or not. It got tiring to me.

I find it fun to dabble and reload after choosing to do something horrible for giggles. But after completing KOTOR as evil as I could be and finding it less than satisfactory, I think I'm basically done with playing the villain.

No you got it wrong. You have the choice of being good, neutral or evil in an evil world. The difference of this game from most other games is not that you are evil, but that the world you live in is evil.
 
Joined
Sep 23, 2008
Messages
5,645
Location
Tardis
Back
Top Bottom