Billie Lurk's motivation is weak (spoilers)

[Stoicism]

Just finished it. Don't get me wrong, it's some nice extra content, but it lacks a story element that made the first two games great. Namely, they set you up with very personal quests for vengeance right from the word go.
But why does Billie want to kill the Outsider? Because Daud asks her nicely? Because she thinks that killing him will end black magic in the world, and then all the people will play nice? (Naïve much Billie?) Seems to me that the rat plague did the world a lot more harm than black magic.

Even if we accept that killing the Outsider is a worthy goal, what do I have against all those cultist leaders? Not much. There isn't a single "personal" assassination in the whole game :(

[chickadeedeedee]

This is why I wish Billie had lead D2. Corvo was redundant and Emily was really weak as a lead. Billie has more of a personal connection going on with so many of the characters, both villains and allies, than the actual leads. And we could have seen more of her relationship with Delilah and had and had a better idea of why we might kill or spare her. Missing that opportunity and then trying to make it up with this is a weird left turn.

Daud leading DOTO would have made so much more sense, he has the grudge that would carry him through the missions but he has a strange enough relationship with mercy that I'd buy the sparing ending too, once he knew the details (which is why his attitude here is a little baffling to me. you're only alive because you got spared for no reason! in the endings they chose you spared both Delilah and Billie! What the hell old man)

[Stoicism]

Billie as the lead for D2? I don't know about that either. Dishonored is about a quest for vengeance. The assassinations feel good because you're getting some justice for how someone wronged you. I agree that Corvo was redundant, but Emily at least was fighting to take back her kingdom from usurpers and traitors. Why would Billie have signed up?

[chickadeedeedee]

Originally posted by Stoicism:

Billie as the lead for D2? I don't know about that either. Dishonored is about a quest for vengeance. The assassinations feel good because you're getting some justice for how someone wronged you. I agree that Corvo was redundant, but Emily at least was fighting to take back her kingdom from usurpers and traitors. Why would Billie have signed up?

Billie has (or was implied to have, before they totally ignored it) a pretty complex relationship with Delilah and the witches. After the events of KoD, I can imagine her being on edge if she heard Delilah was back.

Duke Luca goaded his brother into killing Dierdre, along with losing the one closest to her, her life went completely south after that incident

She wants to rescue Sokolov because he's a close personal friend

Aramis was a close friend of hers, his deranged state is a direct result of the actions of Delilah+Co. (and her missing eye and arm an indirect result)

She generally loathes the rich and powerful and especially hates when their actions lead to the needless sufferring of the poor

She's had an axe to grind since before Emily knew Delilah's name. You wouldn't even have to change the plot much, it just makes more sense to have Emily be running support while Billie does the in-person work. As an added bonus it would have sold me more on the idea of Emily as a leader than any of her actions in the game.

[Stoicism]

Okay, you've sold me. Actually, I've played D1&2, but not KoD, so I was pretty much in the dark about that stuff.

[chickadeedeedee]

Ohhhh yeah, if you haven't played KoD I can see why you wouldn't be sold on Billie generally. It's good! well worth going back to (and super cheap when the sales are on these days) I hardly consider the first game complete without that DLC (Brigmore witches too, obviously).

[Stoicism]

Hmmm, it seems like a pretty risky move marketing-wise to base most of your new game's story on events from DLC. I mean, they're basically aiming for players who have finished absolutely everything else in the series.

[Zekiran]

Actually their dlc is important enough that it's a time when I would fully support having it *as such*. Just want to play the game? Fine, no problem - want to understand the story and get more out of the world? DLC has all that and more. D1 is great in and of itself, as a 'game' but the 'story' part is definitely the expanded 'all of the available information'. I don't mind that they released them as dlc, though, I'd rather have the stuff done well than done 'soon'.

[The Shinsh]

Originally posted by Stoicism:

There isn't a single "personal" assassination in the whole game :(

I don't think there even is an assassination at all besides the Outsider himself. The other ones are just optional, like the leader of that gang and that antio cult leader in that one mission in Dishonored 2.

Originally posted by Stoicism:

Hmmm, it seems like a pretty risky move marketing-wise to base most of your new game's story on events from DLC. I mean, they're basically aiming for players who have finished absolutely everything else in the series.

Wasn't that the entirety of Dishonored 2?

[chickadeedeedee]

Originally posted by Stoicism:

Hmmm, it seems like a pretty risky move marketing-wise to base most of your new game's story on events from DLC. I mean, they're basically aiming for players who have finished absolutely everything else in the series.

Yeah, it was a weird decision. I was hoping for a new main cast when they announced there'd be a sequel, or at least for some new villains, since I didn't (and still don't, tbh) really like Delilah that much. Billie being lead could have made Delilah more engaging as an antagonist by giving us a more nuanced understanding of her character, but I think they really would have been best served by introducing someone new. Especially since they wouldn't have had to void quite so many previous player decisions that way.

[Stoicism]

Wasn't that the entirety of Dishonored 2?

Perhaps. But I would argue that D2 sets up the story enough that even new players can follow it. You have a queen, her loyal bodyguard, and a bunch of usurpers stealing her kingdom. That's all you really need to know.

Originally posted by chickadeedeedee:

Yeah, it was a weird decision. I was hoping for a new main cast when they announced there'd be a sequel, or at least for some new villains, since I didn't (and still don't, tbh) really like Delilah that much. Billie being lead could have made Delilah more engaging as an antagonist by giving us a more nuanced understanding of her character, but I think they really would have been best served by introducing someone new. Especially since they wouldn't have had to void quite so many previous player decisions that way.

Well, now that they've offed the Outsider, they'll have to bring something new to the table next time. If there is a next time.

[chickadeedeedee]

Harvey's said outright that this cast is done. Which makes me pretty amped about the idea of more games in this world. But that "If" is a pretty big one. We can only hope.

[The Shinsh]

Originally posted by chickadeedeedee:

Harvey's said outright that this cast is done. Which makes me pretty amped about the idea of more games in this world. But that "If" is a pretty big one. We can only hope.

The end of the Kaldwin era. It may mean past or future, which I'd like to see. Future most of all.

[chickadeedeedee]

The only problem with going forward in time is the inevitable slide from teslapunk to cyberpunk, which is a road pretty well-travelled currently. I really, really like the aesthetic of this series and I think it would survive going backward in time but going more modern really risks neutering it. I also don't really want to see guns get more prevalent in the gameplay than they already are. I'd rather these games be more thief and less deus ex.

What I want most is a change in geography. All we've seen of this world is a tiny island nation. And only a few cities within it, at that!

[The Shinsh]

Originally posted by chickadeedeedee:

The only problem with going forward in time is the inevitable slide from teslapunk to cyberpunk, which is a road pretty well-travelled currently. I really, really like the aesthetic of this series and I think it would survive going backward in time but going more modern really risks neutering it. I also don't really want to see guns get more prevalent in the gameplay than they already are. I'd rather these games to be more thief and less deus ex.

What I want most is a change in geography. All we've seen of this world is a tiny island nation. And only a few cities within it, at that!

Hm. Guess I'm in a minority then. Maybe guns could be in the game but we have access to none of them but a crappy flintlock from ages ago against the high tech soldiers? Yeah, you're right, it'd probably be dumb.

[Stoicism]

Originally posted by chickadeedeedee:

What I want most is a change in geography. All we've seen of this world is a tiny island nation. And only a few cities within it, at that!

Agreed about not going too far into the future, but I worry about moving away from the Island nation. I mean, the Dishonored aesthetic is based on Imperial British culture. right? Would it be the same if they shifted to a completely different country?