Why I'm glad KOTFE dedicated time to the antagonist's perspective.

[Aowin]

One of the most recurring criticisms I see of KOTFE is the fact the cutscenes aren't always exclusively dedicated to the player character. In particular, a lot of players have criticized BioWare for showing Arcann and Vaylin too much, comparing it to a "television series." I find this odd and even somewhat confusing. The reason being is any good story will generally give multiple perspectives to broaden the world and give it complexity. If the only perspective we ever have is our own, it makes the storytelling incredibly one-dimensional and not nearly as compelling.

 

Most of BioWare's games have developed the antagonist largely through his/her own personal cutscenes. We see this in KOTOR 1 with Darth Malak. We saw this plenty of times in Mass Effect with Saren, The Illusive Man, the Collectors, and even the Reapers. We saw this in Dragon Age with Loghain. We've seen it in Jade Empire. Considering many hold these games in such high esteem, yet commit the same offense that KOTFE does, I'm not sure exactly why KOTFE suffers from this decision.

 

It's also a long-established tradition in Star Wars, itself, to show the villain and what he/she is up to. Whether it's Darth Vader, Darth Sidious, Darth Maul, Darth Tyranus, General Grievous, and now Kylo Ren and Supreme Leader Snoke, the motivations of the other side are incredibly important for developing the story. If we never had any concept or understanding for what the villains were up to, how could we ever truly understand them or enjoy them in the film?

 

If Darth Vader was not shown as much as he was in A New Hope, I doubt many today would ever consider him arguably the greatest villain of all time. One of my major criticisms of the class stories is you do not really get the perspective of the antagonist in any of them, which is why all of the villains are forgettable. The class story is solely focused around the player character, making it one-dimensional and at times boring. I only remember the Sith Emperor for the JK story, and that had more to do with reading the Revan book (where time is dedicated to describing his character in detail) rather than SWTOR.

 

I loved getting to know Arcann and Vaylin more and hopefully this is something BioWare will continue to do as I believe it's incredibly important from a storytelling perspective.

Edited August 21, 2016 by Aowin

[_biddan_]

i couldn't agree more

[josephxp]

Ya, i did enjoy getting the story from both sides, because it either makes the characters more sympathetic or the more you want to drive a lightsaber through their chest. With Arcan, i saw some redeeming qualities which made it easier to let him be redeemed, while Vaylin is just one F'ed up disturbed woman.

[Andryah]

I agree. I like their approach to story in KoTFE, more so then prior expacs to be honest.

 

Story will always be debated and argued about in this game. Everyone thinks they can spin out a better story and approach.... when in reality... the studio has to apply a balanced approach that will appeal to the widest audience of players. So I disagree with the armchair story authors in this forum.

 

Play it the way it is presented IMO, just like you watch a movie as presented. Not every movie will be enjoyed the same by every viewer.... but that is beside the point as viewers do not get imput into a movies plot, theme, characters, etc. And neither do MMO players with MMOs. That is the nature of paying for access to off the shelf entertainment.

Edited August 21, 2016 by Andryah

[DarthDymond]

Honestly, I think a lot of the Class Stories, even many that were still very good, would have been a bit better if there had been some sequences showing the villains.

 

Certain antagonists, like Darth Thanaton for example, felt a little underdeveloped and underwhelming, IMO - some KotFE style cutscenes might have helped make them a bit more compelling as adversaries.

[Aowin]

...

 

I agree. Had every class story taken time to actually give the perspective of the antagonist (as well as a more original visual design for those characters), I think many of those stories would have been better for it. Instead, we received a very superficial understanding of many of these villains, making them generally forgettable and not impactful towards the story.

 

In order to have a great hero, and by extension a great story, you need a great villain to make those connections possible. You are unlikely to ever make such a compelling villain if you don't dedicate time to crafting that character.

[Tsillah]

I will be the first to say that the KotFE story line was lacking on various fronts...however, I have to agree with this part of it. Not so much for Scorpio perhaps but definitely for Arcann and Vaylin.

 

Now if they would use less gimmicky plot twists and fewer holes in the plots themselves, then I'd be a lot more hopeful for KotET

[Rheshalea]

The reason I don't enjoy the antagonist's point of view in KOTFE is that it draws me out of the story of my character.

In writing fiction, normally the writer chooses between First person point of view, Close Third person PoV or Omniscient PoV.

First person PoV is the most limited. It's one person, "I", telling the story, and the reader knows only as much as this person does and finds out more about the plot only when the narrator does. This PoV lets the reader experience the world through the narrator's senses and feelings.

Close (limited) Third person PoV often has multiple main characters, "he" or "she" who are the focus points of the story. Much like First person, the reader experiences the world through the main characters' eyes, but instead of only getting one person's knowledge of what is going on, the plot can be presented through, well, multiple characters.

Omniscient PoV is when the narrator is god-like, and the reader is told things that the main character(s) can't logically know.

 

That's what I felt like when playing KOTFE. I felt as if my character was shown things he or she should not have known. Sure, maybe I was supposed to understand it as Valkorion showing me what his kids were doing, but then that should have been made clear.

I am one of those people who criticized the TV-series feel of KOTFE. It's not because I don't like watching (good) TV-series or movies, but to me, those are vastly different medias than computer games, and especially RPGs. In RPGs, the story, in my opinion, should absolutely be centered around the main character. Or in other words, the story should be told in First person PoV or Close Third, not Omniscient.

 

I've also played table-top RPGs for over 20 years, and the feeling I got in KOTFE was a barrage of constant OOC (Out of Character) information. That's when the player uses information he/she as a player has access to, but the character does not. Or the game master/storyteller allows the non-player characters, including villains/antagonists, knowledge of things the player characters have only discussed between each other.

 

To me, a good suspenseful story can show glimpses of the antagonist, sure. But only when it's logical for the protagonist to see it. The protagonist can be told about the antagonist's doings, maybe witness the destruction the antagonist causes first-hand, and maybe face the antagonist in person, yes. But as soon as the antagonist is shown in a situation the protagonist shouldn't know anything about, it yanks me out of the story and the mystery.

 

So, that's why I personally didn't enjoy the TV-series feel. I'm playing an RPG here. I would like to feel like it, too.

[BorisKarloffe]

One of the most recurring criticisms I see of KOTFE is the fact the cutscenes aren't always exclusively dedicated to the player character. In particular, a lot of players have criticized BioWare for showing Arcann and Vaylin too much, comparing it to a "television series." I find this odd and even somewhat confusing. The reason being is any good story will generally give multiple perspectives to broaden the world and give it complexity. If the only perspective we ever have is our own, it makes the storytelling incredibly one-dimensional and not nearly as compelling.

 

Most of BioWare's games have developed the antagonist largely through his/her own personal cutscenes. We see this in KOTOR 1 with Darth Malak. We saw this plenty of times in Mass Effect with Saren, The Illusive Man, the Collectors, and even the Reapers. We saw this in Dragon Age with Loghain. We've seen it in Jade Empire. Considering many hold these games in such high esteem, yet commit the same offense that KOTFE does, I'm not sure exactly why KOTFE suffers from this decision.

 

It's also a long-established tradition in Star Wars, itself, to show the villain and what he/she is up to. Whether it's Darth Vader, Darth Sidious, Darth Maul, Darth Tyranus, General Grievous, and now Kylo Ren and Supreme Leader Snoke, the motivations of the other side are incredibly important for developing the story. If we never had any concept or understanding for what the villains were up to, how could we ever truly understand them or enjoy them in the film?

 

If Darth Vader was not shown as much as he was in A New Hope, I doubt many today would ever consider him arguably the greatest villain of all time. One of my major criticisms of the class stories is you do not really get the perspective of the antagonist in any of them, which is why all of the villains are forgettable. The class story is solely focused around the player character, making it one-dimensional and at times boring. I only remember the Sith Emperor for the JK story, and that had more to do with reading the Revan book (where time is dedicated to describing his character in detail) rather than SWTOR.

 

I loved getting to know Arcann and Vaylin more and hopefully this is something BioWare will continue to do as I believe it's incredibly important from a storytelling perspective.

 

A good villain is just as important as the hero to a good story. I don't have a problem with that, but there are different ways of developing villains. It depends on the plot of your story and the protagonist's own thought development. There might be no reason to show the villain doing anything since you're supposed to journey from the perspective of your protagonist. Kotor 1 for example doesn't involve much Malak since to do so would've given away the game's big reveal. That big reveal, though, did add a lot to understanding Malak's antagonism toward you.

 

Also, you get to know your villains based on their actions and the interactions with NPCs who tell you things about them. For example, We learn a lot more about Arcann and Vaylin from talking to Senya in the Lady of Sorrows chapter than we do from any of Arcann/Vaylin's own cutscenes.

 

It's been awhile, but I don't recall some of those other BW game villains you mentioned getting hardly any screen time of their own, certainly not near as much as they've given Arcann/Vaylin in KotFE. That's not saying it was a good thing. I'm just saying as far as examples go, some of them wouldn't fit well.

 

The question I would ask is this: At the end of 16 chapters, what exactly have we gotten to know about Arcann and Vaylin through their cutscenes that we didn't know at the end of chapter 2?

 

Valkorion dodged our questions about them (along with pretty much everything else). There was a lot of "Rawr, ima get you Outlander", and some random violence. That's a not character depth.

 

We STILL have no idea why both of them have decided to be evil or turn against the Outlander/Galaxy. They're Saturday morning cartoon villains right now.

 

Like many other things in KotFE, if it had been done right, the reception would have been much different. Instead, we're left with a bunch of pointless padding and promises of next year.

[wangxiuming]

I agree with the OP. SWTOR's storytelling has always strived to emulate the best parts of cinema. In order to develop the antagonist into somebody the player can really get into - well, antagonizing - the storytelling has to focus on them a little bit. The only way to do this from a solely player perspective is to have the antagonist run into the player constantly; the problem with that is if the player and antagonist are constantly meeting each other over and over, it takes the teeth out of the bad guy. It would be hard to say Arcann was a threat if we ran into him in every chapter and survived no problem every time.

 

That said, I do think if Arcann was going to betray Vaylin and help Senya, there should have been more foreshadowing in those Arcann scenes. As it is, it feels a little bit like Arcann randomly and out-of-the-blue decided to defect.

[Rheshalea]

The question I would ask is this: At the end of 16 chapters, what exactly have we gotten to know about Arcann and Vaylin through their cutscenes that we didn't know at the end of chapter 2?

 

Valkorion dodged our questions about them (along with pretty much everything else). There was a lot of "Rawr, ima get you Outlander", and some random violence. That's a not character depth.

 

We STILL have no idea why both of them have decided to be evil or turn against the Outlander/Galaxy. They're Saturday morning cartoon villains right now.

 

Like many other things in KotFE, if it had been done right, the reception would have been much different. Instead, we're left with a bunch of pointless padding and promises of next year.

 

I agree 100% with especially this, but the rest of the post as well. Maybe I wouldn't mind the cutscenes as much as I do if they actually added something new.

Or maybe I wouldn't have minded seeing Arcann and Vaylin if there was a logical reason for me to do so.

[Rolodome]

I've read plenty of stories that only used one perspective, or used one perspective with highly limited (like one chapter in the whole book) perspective change.

 

As I went into in detail in another thread (I forget which) it's not the presence of Arcann and Vaylin's perspective that has problems from a critical standpoint. It's the (for lack of a better word) laziness of it. The general rule in storytelling, with few exceptions, is: Whatever is happening better have a point because if it doesn't, you're wasting time that you could be making a point and you have so precious little of it to make the points you want to make.

 

With Malak, the cutscenes were few and far between, and when they happened, it was something vital that you needed to know to understand something that would happen later, or in the immediate future. The bombing of Taris, Darth Bandon coming after you, Calo Nord coming after you, etc. They had a specific and immediate purpose, they didn't drag on, and once they had made their point, they were done. They also spoke volumes about Malak's character: The ruthlessness with which he was pursuing his quarry, the willingness to essentially throw bodies at the problem. All of it culminating in the eventual (temporary) capture of you.

 

Compare this to Arcann and Vaylin. In some cases, this is done ok, but more often it seems to be a sort of fly-on-the-wall indulgence in watching the two characters interact. I don't remember all of the scenes well, but I do remember quite a bit of back and forth, and repetitive gestures ("I'm evil in case you forgot") that don't serve any direct purpose to the story.

 

Note that in Malak's case, he only needed one cutscene. One to make the point of how evil he is and it was so believable because you'd just been on that planet. You were on that planet. And if you'd made LS decisions, you'd just helped people on that planet. And now it was being bombed to hell, all for the pursuit of one or two people.

 

Versus, "I hurt a bunch of planets and people you have never seen and people you will never meet," "I destroyed a bunch of guards who you don't care about and have never met, or have any reason to be sad about knowing of their death." It's not "bad writing" exactly, but it's the stuff of saturday morning cartoons. It's the knowledge "he's supposed to be evil," without the gut-wrenching emotional tug "holy ****, that dude is evil, how the **** could anyone do that, omg."

 

Same general problem with the part where Vaylin is pursuing you in the beginning. At least in that case, you have a scene with some scientists and such running away, but nonetheless, these are complete strangers to you. You have virtually no reason to care what happens to them.

 

In summary: The general point I'm trying to make is, showing the villain's perspective is not a bad thing, but it can be done poorly and that's where the issue lies with it, is the execution, not the act of doing it at all. In KOTFE's case, it's not terrible. It's not great, but it's not bad either. It's just there are a lot of moments that are forgettable and serve no clear purpose, other than indulging in watching two cartoon evil children squirm in their seats because the schoolyard is being disrupted by another bully.

 

Edit: Just saw someone beat me to the saturday morning cartoon reference. Dunno if I read it subconsciously, or just minds thinking alike. XD

Edited August 21, 2016 by Rolodome

[OldVengeance]

I was really glad we got to see Arcann and Vaylin's perspective throughout the story of Kotfe, so I give major kudos to Bioware for that idea. But by the end, I felt a sense that the scenes had begun to feel pretty repetitive in the later monthly chapters and not a whole lot happened. And the two of them seemed to bungle things a few too many times. It didn't help that they both mocked the other for their impotent rage, every time the Outlander and their crew escaped.

 

So I think it's a good idea, that needs a little work.

Edited August 21, 2016 by OldVengeance

[Codedrago]

Honestly, I think a lot of the Class Stories, even many that were still very good, would have been a bit better if there had been some sequences showing the villains.

 

Certain antagonists, like Darth Thanaton for example, felt a little underdeveloped and underwhelming, IMO - some KotFE style cutscenes might have helped make them a bit more compelling as adversaries.

 

Urg, I'm now imaging how the Warrior's story would be if we didn't spend two chapters developing the villain...

[Damask_Rose]

Personally I think the story of KotFE would have been much stronger if they hadn't done the antagonists' perspectives (or cut out at least 75% of it). I can't think of a single scene with them that made them seem like more of a threat. Instead we get scene after scene of them being petulant brats. Perhaps if they were good villains I would feel differently, but so far they have been spectacularly uninteresting. All of the resources going into showcasing how childish and incompetent they are could have been better spent developing our character's relationships with our allies or showing the devastation being wrought by Zakuul.

[Lunafox]

Personally I think the story of KotFE would have been much stronger if they hadn't done the antagonists' perspectives (or cut out at least 75% of it). I can't think of a single scene with them that made them seem like more of a threat. Instead we get scene after scene of them being petulant brats. Perhaps if they were good villains I would feel differently, but so far they have been spectacularly uninteresting. All of the resources going into showcasing how childish and incompetent they are could have been better spent developing our character's relationships with our allies or showing the devastation being wrought by Zakuul.

 

I agree with you. In many ways they reminded me of a nastier version of Team Rocket. They were just down a Meowth and I have to say Team Rocket were more fun, cause I loved them. Nails on Chalkboard and Butt glued to Throne (henceforth to be called Nails and Butt) weren't terribly interesting, I didn't love them...which for those who know me, know that I LOVE VILLAINS! They're my favorite part of most anything.

Edited August 21, 2016 by Lunafox

[Damask_Rose]

Urg, I'm now imaging how the Warrior's story would be if we didn't spend two chapters developing the villain...

 

You want lengthy cut-scenes showing Baras executing slaves for bringing the wrong flavor of cookies?

[Lunafox]

You want lengthy cut-scenes showing Baras executing slaves for bringing the wrong flavor of cookies?

 

But Baras was made of awesome. I loved how calculating he was. But you know, if we saw every moment of his machinations some of the mystery and intrigue would have been lost, much like with Nails and Butt.

[Rolodome]

(henceforth to be called Nails and Butt)

Lmao.

[DarthSpuds]

One of the most recurring criticisms I see of KOTFE is the fact the cutscenes aren't always exclusively dedicated to the player character

 

Evidence to back up such a claim?

 

I can recall precisely NO ONE complaining that all cutscenes should exclusively be about the player character.

 

I can assume that as your basic premise is wrong, everything else is as well.

 

All The Best

[Codedrago]

You want lengthy cut-scenes showing Baras executing slaves for bringing the wrong flavor of cookies?

 

I would of preferred a scene of him reacting to learning of your survival. "OH ****! DRAAUGH, YOU BETTER GET OFF YOUR ARSE AND FIND HIM!"... Then he kills the slaves for cookies.

[Aowin]

Evidence to back up such a claim?

 

I can recall precisely NO ONE complaining that all cutscenes should exclusively be about the player character.

 

I can assume that as your basic premise is wrong, everything else is as well.

 

All The Best

 

Considering there are plenty of posters who obviously hold that belief in this thread and are disagreeing with the OP, "I can assume that as your basic premise is wrong, everything else is as well.

 

All The Best."

Edited August 21, 2016 by Aowin

[Aowin]

I actually agree with much of your critiques. Obviously, if you are going to showcase anything, it needs to have a point and somehow drive the narrative forward. My point is, many were claiming they didn't even want the antagonist's perspective AT ALL.

 

I disagree with this premise that a "computer game" is somehow different than film or television, especially with BioWare games. As far back as KOTOR, BioWare's Doctors had been linking the similarities of their storytelling to television and film. Story is the same regardless of the medium. The same rules apply. Unless we have a story in which the protagonist should be ignorant of the antagonist's devices, there is no reason not to develop the antagonist.

 

This is obviously a Star Wars game and I believe it's smart of BioWare to take a storytelling approach similar to the films. Everybody here obviously (I'd hope) likes Star Wars. If BioWare executes those storytelling moments well, I don't believe anybody would criticize the story.

 

I'm certainly not suggesting everything BioWare did with Arcann and Vaylin was perfect, but I'm happy they were featured nonetheless. Truth be told, I think less of the issue had to do with Arcann and Vaylin being shown and more of the problem was terrible pacing between Chapter X to Chapter XVI.

 

Not much of anything really happened for most of those chapters. Yet, BioWare still wanted to give the antagonist's perspective of what the other side was up to. Hopefully we'll just have less filler in the future. But, cutting down on how often we see the villains isn't necessarily the right approach.

 

As someone else already indicated, Darth Malak was used incredibly well, and I'd say we saw him quite often when it came to moving the plot (typically after completing the content of a planet). BioWare just needs to improve the pacing of the story and I think many of the other errors will resolve themselves.

 

I just don't want another situation where we only see our perspective and never get to know the villain. This is not a tabletop RPG. There is no game master and I'm not in a dungeon with other players. This is Star Wars and as such I want to be immersed in that Star Wars experience the way a Star Wars story is told. Not to mention, BioWare has a long, established history of showing the villain's perspective in most of its games (of which are all role playing games).

 

BioWare games have always been about story first and role playing second. This is not Bethesda Game Studios where role playing is all that matters and the story that is presented is too weak, or poorly written, that no one cares for it. Why would BioWare not continue this tradition?

 

I was honestly surprised the class stories lacked that antagonist perspective, which was one of the main reasons I felt none of the class stories rivaled any of BioWare's previous games. You can only have a great hero if you have a great villain. It's hard to have a great villain if you never actually see him/her to understand why he/she thinks the way he/she does.

Edited August 21, 2016 by Aowin

[EpicOlympian]

I don't think people disliked the occasional cuts to the throne room. Maybe it seems like it because the cutscenes overall put more emphasis on the villains (and almost every other NPC) than the player character. We feel like bystanders most of the time. Your allies do all the work for you and whenever you get to say something about a different approach or really just want to voice your opinion, they teach you better (Don't even get me started on Aric vs. Wrath in Chapter 11).

 

I initially enjoyed seeing the villains' perspective, but as the story progressed, most of the time it was just bickering between Arcann & Vaylin, then one line by Arcann to make him sound cool without making sense and one line by over the top crazy b*tch Vaylin involving some random act of violence (followed by some super weird facial expressions that the animators just couldn't get right). The cutscenes should have made them interesting and showcase their personalities on a deeper level. As of now they are really bland and one-note villains.

 

KotFE's writing just isn't as stellar as it should be given the focus on story. Arcann and Vaylin's lines do fit better in the context of a trailer, but no one really talks like that, especially in a dialogue between siblings without an audience.

TV shows can set up compelling villains with minimal dialogue (even the Blur trailer did that better) and while I can see that it isn't easy within the limitations of the game to do something similar without it coming across as wonky (like the facial expressions above or some cantina scenes), there's no excuse to not have meaningful character development in these scenes.

Edited August 21, 2016 by EpicOlympian

[Aowin]

...

 

What you are addressing is not an issue with the antagonist's perspective. It is an issue with how BioWare is developing the story with regard to your role as the Alliance Commander. It's the same problem Dragon Age Inquisition had. You had Leliana, Josephine, and Cullen running the Inquisition while you were its poster child. The same is the case with KOTFE. Lana, Theron, Senya, and Koth are running the show while you are the poster child. This can easily be rectified if BioWare just allows us to make the final decisions rather than delegating this power to advisors.

 

I agree there can definitely be improvement. That is why these forums are here and we can voice our concerns. I would just caution other posters to outright want to strip entire features from the game rather than try to fix them. The first nine chapters showcased Vaylin and Arcann fairly well for the most part. I think many of the issues players are pointing towards are the last seven chapters where nothing really happens but the Outlander always gets away and Arcann is disgruntled. That's an issue with the storytelling, not the antagonist's perspective itself.

 

Truth be told, I think a lot of these issues could be resolved if we just had more of an explanation of these characters. All we have really seen is the "bad" side of them with little else. We got very little context from Valkorian and Senya, so what we see is really all we get. I think this can be improved upon, especially with regard to Arcann's uncertain fate. I certainly agree improvements need to be made, but that doesn't have to happen at the cost of the antagonist's perspective entirely.