I completely saw that one coming

[Nym]

Seriously, I could have been blind and I would still see Darios's betreyal from a miles away.

I'll give the writers a B for effort for the idea but I think the developers kinda spoiled the surprise. An ally planning to betray his ''friends'' is nothing new but...

This reminds me of Guntler in Revelation where he can't support with anyone because he become an enemy boss at some point. I understand that was for gameplay reasons.

But honestly I think making him an ally that you can't even control unlike the other units that are not in the party of 4 was the biggest mistake. And have you seen this guy fighting? A Fort Captain or even an Outpost Captain is more useful than him. He looks like he's just holding back instead of actually fighting.

Also I know Takumi is Takumi but that scene at before Chapter 14 made it even more obvious.

Oh and, not to mention that when he got captured, he was just chilling in his cell. Not bruises or any side of fear or shock whatsoever.

Overhall, that's not how you make a character betrays the main characters.

Edited November 4, 2017 by Nym

[Slumber]

I mean, wasn't he possessed the last time we saw him?

Attacked by evil red sexual energy, then totally cool the next time he showed up, so no duh he was gonna betray us.

[thecrimsonflash]

I didn't think it was poorly handled, it was obviously going to happen because that's just what happens to characters like him(he either dies or betrays you) but I do think they put a pretty unique spin on it, where he wasn't planning from the very beginning to betray you, kinda like lyon, but if he was possessed later on.

[Folt]

Hardin if Hardin got possessed/turned by dark forces during the events of the game instead of before.

[Etrurian emperor]

I suddenly found Darius to become a much better character post possession. Its not very well written but his voice actor is having a lot of fun playing evil Darius and gets corny lines like ''You're done with rainbows and sunshine? Now its time for terror and woe'' 

[Fabulously Olivier]

11 hours ago, Nym said:

And have you seen this guy fighting? A Fort Captain or even an Outpost Captain is more useful than him. He looks like he's just holding back instead of actually fighting.

That applies to every AI controlled hero though. Off screen, they can actually achieve things, kill captains, and take forts. On screen, their AI is more passive and severely dumbed down.

I think it's intentional. It helps preserve the power fantasy by ensuring that the player always looks comparatively competent. Plus, it helps prevent the AI from stealing captain kills that the player intended to level their controlled hero with.

[Thany]

2 hours ago, Etheus said:

That applies to every AI controlled hero though. Off screen, they can actually achieve things, kill captains, and take forts. On screen, their AI is more passive and severely dumbed down.

I think it's intentional. It helps preserve the power fantasy by ensuring that the player always looks comparatively competent. Plus, it helps prevent the AI from stealing captain kills that the player intended to level their controlled hero with.

This isnt the case with darios specifically, he hardly gets any kills on his own, your controllable allies controlled by AI do much more work then he does himself even when onscreen. even goes to the ally units you cannot control but bring with you.

Darios is just a jerkface. :P

Edited November 4, 2017 by Thany

[thecrimsonflash]

7 hours ago, Etheus said:

That applies to every AI controlled hero though. Off screen, they can actually achieve things, kill captains, and take forts. On screen, their AI is more passive and severely dumbed down.

I think it's intentional. It helps preserve the power fantasy by ensuring that the player always looks comparatively competent. Plus, it helps prevent the AI from stealing captain kills that the player intended to level their controlled hero with.

I think its more of a "lets not break the switch, thank you", the game barely runs in two player, let alone with up to 7 ai controlled allies performing complicated combos on various targets.

[Lau]

I liked it, but then again, I like the cliché stuff.

I think it wasn't a shocker because, well, we've seen it before in other games and media. There's only so many ways you can write a betrayal, and I think we've seen them all, so we can kinda see through it/pick up on it like, "oh hey, this guy isn't doing anything beneficial, he's gonna betray us, yay".

[Nym]

11 hours ago, Etheus said:

That applies to every AI controlled hero though. Off screen, they can actually achieve things, kill captains, and take forts. On screen, their AI is more passive and severely dumbed down.

I think it's intentional. It helps preserve the power fantasy by ensuring that the player always looks comparatively competent. Plus, it helps prevent the AI from stealing captain kills that the player intended to level their controlled hero with.

I'm not sure, even on screen the heroes will cut down enemies. Not like the player but close enough.

 

2 hours ago, Lau said:

I liked it, but then again, I like the cliché stuff.

I think it wasn't a shocker because, well, we've seen it before in other games and media. There's only so many ways you can write a betrayal, and I think we've seen them all, so we can kinda see through it/pick up on it like, "oh hey, this guy isn't doing anything beneficial, he's gonna betray us, yay".

True but maybe if Darios could actually be a decent ally, it would have been less fishy

[Folt]

9 hours ago, Nym said:

I'm not sure, even on screen the heroes will cut down enemies. Not like the player but close enough.

 

True but maybe if Darios could actually be a decent ally, it would have been less fishy

Actually, I find Darios to be a rather decent ally, but at the point where you assault the Gristonne stronghold (for the first time), he is an unpromoted Lord facing mostly spear users and monsters. compared to your party which is set up with many allies, some of them promoted.